Cosford update

Being a wee bit liberal with the truth methinks

Cosford 9/4/06

Popped up today to get some pictures before the dismantling begins, there was an interesting notice attached to the fence around the 707 giving the ‘ spinned version’ of whats happening – I’ve attched it so hopefully you can read it. Interestingly it gives the impression that ALL the 707 is going to East Fortune – rather than just the front fuselage :confused:

Anyway heres a few from today.

The owner of the Boeing 707 was certainly the Seattle company . It was part of a deal for new airliners . I would suggest however that the company is happier with the prospect of them being parted out to another home rather than a long and lingering death at Cosford.

I do hope that BA and the RAF Museum were able to establish who actually owned VC10 G-ARVM. Seems the true owner could be Boeing, believe it or not

I’ll back David on this – said at a meeting by someone high-up in the RAFM a couple of months ago.

Roger Smith.

I do hope that BA and the RAF Museum were able to establish who actually owned VC10 G-ARVM. Seems the true owner could be Boeing, believe it or not. It and three other VC10’s (G-ARVB, VE & VH) may all have been part of a part exchange deal with Boeing for Rolls Royce powered Boeing 747 in 1976. (The other three VC10s were scraped at Heathrow in about October 1976). Could be a bit embarrassing if Boeing ever ask for their property back.

David, I’d be very surprised if that was the case since British Airways continued to use G-ARVM up until its final flight to Cosford in 1979. If ‘VM was also part of the deal between Boeing and BA then surely it wouldn’t have continued in active service? The scrapping of ‘VB, ‘VE and ‘VH caused a bit of an uproar back then as they were scrapped in front of the people who had serviced and flown them up until that day. It is a sad thought that ‘VM now awaits the same fate. 🙁

I do hope that BA and the RAF Museum were able to establish who actually owned VC10 G-ARVM. Seems the true owner could be Boeing, believe it or not. It and three other VC10’s (G-ARVB, VE & VH) may all have been part of a part exchange deal with Boeing for Rolls Royce powered Boeing 747 in 1976. (The other three VC10s were scraped at Heathrow in about October 1976). Could be a bit embarrassing if Boeing ever ask for their property back.

Just think in twenty years time when it’s due a ‘superhangar’ upgrade all they need to do is jack up each collapsed end and put some joists in !

I’ve just remembered what it reminds me of – the Ripley’s “Believe it or not” building at Niagara Falls! (Which I wish now that I had photographed)

Looks to me like they’ve tried to build airspace on some very soft ground

Consul – I cant help but feel in that picture that the VC-10 is trying to edge ahead of the Belfast to get into the safety of the hangar ! Have to admit it now that Britain has an attraction that can rival Orlando in terms of being one of those ‘earthquake’ lookalike buildings.

The half-collapsed building in the background seems to have been hit by a tornado! Don’t tell me this is Cosford’s latest masterpiece!

The lighter side

Not sure which of the two threads I should have posted this to so here goes again. Please click on my pic to read text:

Would suggest that any one who wants to see the airliners at Cosford gets up there quick. VC10 nose only to Brooklands, Trident nose only to Scotland National museum, the rest of the airframes to the museum of flight. The 707 already has a fence round it and the engine covers are off!!!!

This threads seems to have gone a bit off topic in a Duxford direction.. anyone got any more news or photos on what work has so far been carried out at Duxford. I think theres a fair few people around like me who will be hoping until the last possible moment that the Trident and VC10 at least might win a reprieve 🙁

TwinOtter23,

Duxford is now trialling an optional (as was the previous incarnation of Gift Aid) £1.30 surcharge (10% of an adult ticket value) which will enable those that wish to continue helping DX with Gift Aid contributions. This is clearly not ideal, as there is a cost to the visitor, but its take-up will be monitored over the coming months. It’s impossible to say what effect the changes will have on museum’s “at the gate” funding, but AirSpace itself is (as I understand things) funded by and large by designated chunks money from various sources.

Quite a minor point, but it’s not “Air and Space”, it’s “AirSpace”.

JonathanF – sorry for the hic-up on AirSpace, but there seem to be so many versions floating around, even the Airspace version in the airshow thread.

Fingers crossed that the 10% Gift Aid option doesn’t have too many negative implications across the preservation movement.

TwinOtter23,

Duxford is now trialling an optional (as was the previous incarnation of Gift Aid) £1.30 surcharge (10% of an adult ticket value) which will enable those that wish to continue helping DX with Gift Aid contributions. This is clearly not ideal, as there is a cost to the visitor, but its take-up will be monitored over the coming months. It’s impossible to say what effect the changes will have on museum’s “at the gate” funding, but AirSpace itself is (as I understand things) funded by and large by designated chunks money from various sources.

Quite a minor point, but it’s not “Air and Space”, it’s “AirSpace”.

Twin,

A set of ‘appropriate’ doors was costed at the time.

An exercise; which took the respective capital cost of the appropriate doors and the demountable wall, the number of times such doors would actually be required, a ‘reasonable time frame’ and the cost of future; as yet undated but at least once every five years; demounting of the walls, and compared them all to discover which came out as the most cost effective solution at the time was undertaken.

The result of that exercise is what was built..

So squaring the circle or not the reality reflects the financial position at the time the decision needed to be made.

Michelf

I understand the evaluation taken but I didn’t necessarily mean doors on the current AAM building design!

All things considered this more or less takes me back to my earlier posting [# 167] on April 2nd.

i.e. “The comment about not getting Lottery Funding for “square” buildings is not wholly correct, and Newark’s Hangar 2 highlights this. Also consider a couple of paragraphs from one of my earlier posts on another thread:
“Several years ago I attended a seminar organised by the British Aviation Preservation Council [BAPC] at Duxford in the summer of 2000. The seminar etc…etc…”

With the future of the BA Collection now largely known, with only fuselage sections being saved on three of the airframes perhaps the 2000 cost estimates in #167 might even be reduced.

So with that thought I feel that I should perhaps call it quits on the building shape / style front.

I do however have a couple of quick points about what effect, if any you think yesterday’s change to the terms for Gift Aid donations in lieu of admission fees will have at Duxford?

Could the new requirements have an impact on the funding stream for the Air and Space project or do you think visitors will agree to donate the extra 10% now required for the donation to qualify for Gift Aid?

Twin,

A set of ‘appropriate’ doors was costed at the time.

An exercise; which took the respective capital cost of the appropriate doors and the demountable wall, the number of times such doors would actually be required, a ‘reasonable time frame’ and the cost of future; as yet undated but at least once every five years; demounting of the walls, and compared them all to discover which came out as the most cost effective solution at the time was undertaken.

The result of that exercise is what was built..

So squaring the circle or not the reality reflects the financial position at the time the decision needed to be made.

The 707 woulld fall apart if is was moved been in a poor state for a number of years years

ASI managed (eventually) to put the East Fortune Concorde together so lets hope they cut in a sympathetic manner. Iwould hazard a guess that thye may be tasked with the transport and preparation for display as the work required would be too great for the East Fortune staff to carry out.