Vulcan Suffers Engine Damage

Any news on the Vulcan?
Would like to see her this year if possible.

She’s having enigine runs at the moment.

Any news on the Vulcan?
Would like to see her this year if possible.

Things are looking up chaps that’s the main thing. They are ready to fit the new engines not sure how Long it takes to fit an engine on the Vulcan???

RAF fitters could do it in seven hours i read recently in the mothermagazine:cool:

I see from the latest post on the Vulcan FB page that they now claim to have enough money to see them all the way through the season & next Winters maintenance… so I assume this will mean no begging letters until they are ready for the first flight of 2013?

On one on the news bytes emails they mentioned after talks with the caa they would release some big ‘news’ about the jubilee

http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2011/10/12/vulcan-by-royal-appointment/5619/

As I said, there is nothing beyond statements that VTTS were hoping to be invited to take part. No official source related to any of the Jubilee flypasts has made even a passing reference to the Vulcan.

The article in the link in the post by TonyT is only about the proposed Jubilee Tour by XH558 which VTTS had planned for some time and was not related to the official Jubilee flypasts.

“Not normally” is CAA speak for don’t, as “we recommend” is you will

Jim, from current Permit rules
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP733.PDF

For light aircraft, homebuilts, microlights etc that rule has been withdrawn.

For ex Military Aircraft I think the limitations are individual to the aircraft and stated on the Permit. There is another CAP somewhere if you want to look it up.

Either way, ‘not normally be permitted’ is a fair way from ‘forbidden’

Limitations of use of a Permit to Fly aircraft
In recognition of the lack of compliance with some of the standards of airworthiness, the issue and continued validity of a Permit to Fly will reflect the limitations under which an aircraft is permitted to operate, and will normally be more restrictive than the operating conditions permitted in the case of a comparable aircraft operating on a Certificate of Airworthiness. The limitations are as follows:
a) Flights will normally be restricted to day Visual Flight Rules (VFR) only.
b) Limitations may be placed upon the numbers of persons permitted to be carried in the aircraft, either in general, or in specific operational circumstances.
c) Aircraft will be required to be placarded showing operating limitations and conditions.
d) Aircraft will normally be restricted to flights within UK airspace unless the prior agreement of the country in which the flights are to be made is obtained.
e) Aircraft will not normally be permitted to fly over congested areas.

Jim, from current Permit rules
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP733.PDF

have edited my post re the BM 737, would suggest you do the same to your quote, so as not to show an incorrect fact on the Web, I was going on what I was told at the time.

Just a quick pic of the damage that can accrue to a jet engine when something that shouldn’t goes through the intake when it’s running.

That looks familiar. There’s one in the Airbase hangar at Coventry that looks a lot like that.

True, but it happens, I remember an incident involving a BM 737 where something was missed and the aircraft had to make an emergency landing elsewhere with pax on, the accountable manager who was not involved nor worked at the hangar was taken to court I believe, got a record and was dismissed.

If you are referring to the aircraft, which made an emergency landing at Luton due to oil starvation on both engines, then you are incorrect.

I still cannot get over the fact it was going to do a jubilee Flypast over London, how does that work? as permit aircraft are forbidden from flying over built up areas.

The rule for not allowing LAA permit aircraft lying over ‘congested areas’, was dropped a couple of years ago. Don’t think there is a specific rule prohibiting ex Mil, on CAA permit, flying over congested areas either.

FOD

Just a quick pic of the damage that can accrue to a jet engine when something that shouldn’t goes through the intake when it’s running.

Glad to hear that the situation is recoverable and that 558 will be back on the circuit again soon. As has already been voiced here: it could have been so much worse.

Anon.

*
Though there are no plans to commit it to a starring role during the Olympics, Vulcan to the Sky Trust CEO Dr Robert Pleming says it is his hope to fly it over all four capital cities of the UK, London, Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast. A safety case is also being presented to the CAA for a potential flypast over London and Buckingham Palace.

http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2011/10/12/vulcan-by-royal-appointment/5619/

Really?????? Since when exactly.

I think it was an aspiration on the part of Dr P and VTTS – they kept dropping hints that they would like to be invited, but I haven’t seen any official statements suggesting that their dreams were likely to be fulfilled.

On one on the news bytes emails they mentioned after talks with the caa they would release some big ‘news’ about the jubilee. Engine woes but that baby to bed.

I still cannot get over the fact it was going to do a jubilee Flypast over London

Really?????? Since when exactly.

I think it was an aspiration on the part of Dr P and VTTS – they kept dropping hints that they would like to be invited, but I haven’t seen any official statements suggesting that their dreams were likely to be fulfilled.

True, but it happens,

I still cannot get over the fact it was going to do a jubilee Flypast over London, how does that work? as permit aircraft are forbidden from flying over built up areas.

Doubt if dismissing people is the answer here, nothing to be gained by doing so.

My money is on there procedures getting a right grilling.

Thumper -spare engines are your insurance policy against mishap . The supply is dwindling and to loose two serviceable engines in one go is very unfortunate. Therefore TVOC need to have a long hard look at their future plans as there are no overhauls available . This isnt knee jerk reaction -its the reality .

He does however hold ultimate responsibility to ensure these things do not happen, one wonders if he is the accountable manager.

…There is no excuse to leave FOD in the intakes!!!! There is no excuse however much this fowl up costs, it is down to the top man.

Dear Doctor its time you went. As you informed us at Hus Bos three years ago you could earn more in (Industry). I do not think so. Thats why you are still hanging in. As was said many years ago ” For Gods sake go!!”

I don’t agree that the head of the organisation should be dismissed for a mistake. I think it would result in a ruderless and demoralised company, just when it needs someone to keep it on track.

The poster is, of course, entitled to their opinion which is very clear.

Warbirds have had mishaps throughout history of preservation because of silly things done by maintenance [or lack of],pilots,ground crew error .If this had been a Spitfire ,Seafire,Hurricane or P51 there wouldn’t half as much slagging off and “lets ground her” comments as there is about this last airworthy Vulcan.
As Bruce says lets lets let them get her back up where she belongs.
There isn’t anyone posting on here that hasn’t made a bad mistake somewhere in life.