November 13, 2015 at 5:55 pm
Just announced that VTTS are discussing with The People’s Mosquito about joining forces.
By: Bruce - 16th November 2015 at 18:12
Please elaborate 🙂
Elsewhere in this thread it is suggested that the BHHH aeroplane is not the Glyn Powell example. However, another strong rumour suggests that one has also been sold to the UK. Time will tell. I’m not saying its true – but its what I’m hearing too.
By: Sabrejet - 16th November 2015 at 15:12
It’s widely believed that the Air Force was not happy with the prospect of a strategic bomber flying in civil hands…
They don’t seem to mind the B-29s.
In any case, how about XC-99 To The Sky?
By: TwinOtter23 - 16th November 2015 at 11:08
Covered in here http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?137029-wheres-the-meteor-gone
Anyone got lots of Meteor spares? 😮
By: Tin Triangle - 16th November 2015 at 10:46
Oh and the Meteor NF.11 to operate
Erm, have I missed something? Where the heck did that one come from?
By: J Boyle - 16th November 2015 at 07:00
B36 Peacemaker to the sky? 😀
Most here will be rather surprised to learn that in the early 1970s there was a serious effort to restore the Ft. Worth example (the last built as well as the last to fly) to flight. A book was published about the aircraft as a fund raising effort.
After years of outdoor display, it was restored and stored disassembled before finding a new home at the Pima museum.
It’s widely believed that the Air Force was not happy with the prospect of a strategic bomber flying in civil hands, but even in the days of “cheap” fuel and oil, the aircraft’s appetite must have given even enthusiastic backers of the project, pause.
Even in Texas.
By: j_jza80 - 16th November 2015 at 04:18
If the stories currently circulating are to be believed, the TPM/VTTS one will be third, not second, in line to join the UK Airshow scene
Please elaborate 🙂
By: j_jza80 - 16th November 2015 at 04:18
I think perhaps some people are (once again!) (deliberately?) misunderstanding the aims and intentions of the ETNA project that VTTS are embarking on. From the 3rd November VTTS newsletter:
Note the sentence I have highlighted 😉 The specifics of VTTS involvement with TPM are still being discussed, so we don’t yet know how far their input will go, and the above certainly indicates them possibly being involved with more than one project in some capacity.
Note the last sentence too; “And of course, we may be tempted by a new project ourselves, if the right opportunity arises.”
B36 Peacemaker to the sky? 😀
By: plough - 16th November 2015 at 02:07
I think perhaps some people are (once again!) (deliberately?) misunderstanding the aims and intentions of the ETNA project that VTTS are embarking on. From the 3rd November VTTS newsletter:
The team that put Vulcan XH558 back into the skies and operated her successfully within one of the world’s most demanding safety regimes is now available to help other heritage aviation projects happen. As one of the four pillars of the ETNA Programme we are building, the Heritage Aviation Restoration & Operation activity will pull together those skills that have allowed us to deliver the world’s most challenging return-to-flight programme; so that we can help others achieve their historic aviation goals………………..
….We are already embarking on a consultation process with other aircraft owners and restoration projects and the response has been enthusiastic; we hope to be able to make announcements in coming months on some important projects. It’s worth making the point that we are not aiming to take over activities. We can lead, manage, restore, operate or simply advise. And of course, we may be tempted by a new project ourselves, if the right opportunity arises.
Note the sentence I have highlighted 😉 The specifics of VTTS involvement with TPM are still being discussed, so we don’t yet know how far their input will go, and the above certainly indicates them possibly being involved with more than one project in some capacity.
By: David Burke - 15th November 2015 at 17:42
Geoff -VTTS have an academy to finance and build. A training scheme for various aspects of airport employment to implement- a ‘Cold War’ exhibition and a Vulcan to maintain and ground run ! Oh and the Meteor NF.11 to operate and potentially a Mosquito project to support!
If they achieve all of that I cannot see them having much time left !
By: 1batfastard - 15th November 2015 at 16:02
Odd choice, a connection with another avro aircraft would of been nice and again a chance to aid seeing something rare and unique in the skies.
Hi All,
robdd,
I agree with you matey two candidates spring to mind immediately they could put their considerable weight behind these projects to help get them airborne NX611 and WR963 ? Their involvement would obviously have to be based upon the proviso the projects are still run and owned by LAHC and SPT and they are the lesser partners ? If I remember wasn’t there some murmuring that the VTTS were actually thinking of being involved with NX611 in some way ? (Please correct if wrong)
I suppose the main sticking point with both these aircraft is in what way will VTTS will be involved either financially or other and would they want more control of those projects than what the both would allow ? :confused:
Geoff.
By: Bruce - 15th November 2015 at 10:23
You didn’t have to moderate the damn thing. I would note that it sowed the seeds for the TPM project!
By: Mike J - 15th November 2015 at 10:01
Oh, come on Bruce, where’s your sense of fun? That particular topic was an endless source of fun and amusement last time around! 🙂
By: Bruce - 15th November 2015 at 07:43
Please, please, let’s not stray into the alternative materials argument again. I don’t think I could stand it.
John, £6m is pretty close, of you are starting from scratch. Might be less if you bought the part complete project.
By: Mike J - 15th November 2015 at 00:37
Indeed you are right Stan. For some years now it has been John Green who seems to think that Mosquitos should be made out of metal these days.
By: Stan Smith - 15th November 2015 at 00:22
Ref #44. Can you inform me Mike J what you are on about?? Glynn has never proposed a “Metal Mosquito”. All his production is to drawing and spec. Possible exception is use of modern epoxy glues instead of the WW2 synthetics. There is an enormous amount of metal fittings but basic structure is wood. This I know as I am the signatory inspector/engineer on Glynn’s work.
By: John Green - 15th November 2015 at 00:14
3 million David? More like 6.
Steve Vizard mentioned 4 mill. a while ago.
By: John Green - 15th November 2015 at 00:10
Probably because nobody else thought that making a Mosquito out of metal was a good idea.
With the bonus that an ally Mosquito would have been around for even your descendents.
By: robdd1 - 14th November 2015 at 20:57
Odd choice, a connection with another avro aircraft would of been nice and again a chance to aid seeing something rare and unique in the skies.
By: charliehunt - 14th November 2015 at 20:35
Oops! 😉 Text corrected……
By: Mike J - 14th November 2015 at 20:10
Large private doners maybe…
With extra chilli sauce, perhaps?