May 2, 2017 at 4:45 pm
Surprised I haven’t seen this posted here.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4465418/Classic-World-War-Two-jet-rips-runway.html
By: uuoret - 9th May 2017 at 20:52
Perhaps this should be reposted in the “How Low can you Go” thread….:)
By: Rob68 - 8th May 2017 at 23:07
Taken at 600mm from the other end of airfield

By: blurrkup - 8th May 2017 at 19:45
Hi All,
Any idea if they will now be renewing the runway completely rather than just the parts that tore up ? If so I assume they would try and get a fundraiser going
for it and those who have attended air-shows at the airfield would welcome it. I think even those who have never been wouldn’t mind dipping into their pockets
for a worthwhile cause I bet ?Geoff.
I believe on another video, it was said the runway was due for relaying at the end of this month.
By: FMK.6JOHN - 7th May 2017 at 19:36
Hi there,
As an armchair pilot/runway repair man I would say without any doubt that the entire runway would need re-surfacing in a much better fashion than has been done prior to this incident, that is of course if the airfield wants to operate this type of aircraft again, it certainly was from my point of view very toe curling to watch, firstly the take off roll was indeed very lengthy (but of course that is an illusion of not being able to see the runway in the film), and secondly it was by some sort of fate/miracle that debris did not damage the airframe in a terminal manner, the consequences of which do not bear thinking about.
I wonder if the crew were aware of what was going on either by way of rear view mirror or tower radio traffic, lets not also forget that concords demise was brought about by runway debris puncturing the fuel tanks, one hopes that whatever investigation is done will bring about positive measures to prevent this happening again.
Please not all comments are made without malice or education, just thinking out loud with a sensible head on, the pilots did a sterling job of seeing the take off roll through and getting aloft in the face of deteriorating circumstances.
Regards,
John.
By: 1batfastard - 7th May 2017 at 16:20
Hi All,
Any idea if they will now be renewing the runway completely rather than just the parts that tore up ? If so I assume they would try and get a fundraiser going
for it and those who have attended air-shows at the airfield would welcome it. I think even those who have never been wouldn’t mind dipping into their pockets
for a worthwhile cause I bet ?
Geoff.
By: Fournier Boy - 7th May 2017 at 13:35
That is very true Chitts – but I have time to lose about 25% of my body weight, cut the grass short and wait for a breeze right along the strip!
Would be good to see her alongside one of your machines hopefully next summer!
FB
By: Nige - 7th May 2017 at 10:11
in terms of vampires being that the runway was shorter than the book distance required
Experienced Vampire pilots on the dark side have said that it was within limits – not by a big margin though…
By: Chitts - 7th May 2017 at 08:03
FB
You’ll become used to using most of the runway when you get that Luton Minor going!
By: canadair - 6th May 2017 at 04:41
Certainly not balanced field but then again this aircraft is not subject to this criteria. (Single engine) therefore the longest runway was acceptable length for departure, assuming 16/34 (3878 ft) was used, however if any of the others were used, 10/28 or 04/22 then he was at his performance limit with no margins, and in fact as you say beyond them.
Look, mistakes happen, choices made are hard to change once enacted.(on the roll)
It’s the the nature of current times that everything we do seems to be videotaped and posted for all to discuss and dissect.
By: Malcolm McKay - 6th May 2017 at 03:40
See my previous post#11
Just testing, mods.
By: Fournier Boy - 5th May 2017 at 18:40
Not really long is it? It’s long compared to the length of runway available, but short in terms of vampires being that the runway was shorter than the book distance required.
Highly irresponsible
FB
By: ozplane - 5th May 2017 at 16:52
See my previous post#11
By: Fournier Boy - 5th May 2017 at 16:18
Particularly if one was to look up the min take off distance required for a vampire and then compare it to the length of the runway used.
FB
By: Meddle - 5th May 2017 at 12:59
I suppose the video is amusing enough, but post-Shoreham an incident like this could result in negative PR. It looks somewhat cavalier and amateurish to have the Vampire merrily fragging the runway, regardless of harm done.
By: Trolly Aux - 5th May 2017 at 11:45
or in this thread.
A TAR VERY MUCH BUTTON
By: ericmunk - 5th May 2017 at 10:37
Goblin up the Tarmac
Never mind the quote function (which btw also still works from mobile): we need a like button!
By: Ron Cuskelly - 5th May 2017 at 03:02
Goblin up the Tarmac
By: Miggers - 3rd May 2017 at 19:09
Quite like how the DM mentioned the Vampire’s “powerful engine”……………
By: Mark12 - 3rd May 2017 at 15:39
Or just copy the text you require quoting, then hit the small speech bubble icon on the reply window tool bar (last one on the right), then paste the text between the tags…
Testing Testing
By: Bob - 3rd May 2017 at 15:11
Mk12
Start your quote with (quote), and end it with (/quote)
Replace the above brackets with square brackets.
Or just copy the text you require quoting, then hit the small speech bubble icon on the reply window tool bar (last one on the right), then paste the text between the tags…