This is revisionism for its own sake; so here is my two penneth.

Yes it was probably fear of the Navy that caused Sealion to be abandoned, I remember seeing German doccuments that implied this whilst doing my degree – although if asked to produce them I wouldn’t be able to.

However as I understand it, had the RAF been defeated then the next step of the German plan would have been to systematically destroy the Royal Navy in port (same principle as Pearl Harbour or Tarranto), prior to the invasion. Since the RAF defeated the Luftwaffe thus preventing the destruction of the fleet it is quite clear that the RAF won the Battle of Britain thus saving the UK from the Nazi Jackboot.

For my money these so called accademics should be stripped of their degrees, and horse whipped round the RAF’s Battle of Britain airfields – Twice!

Steve.

Personally I can’t fault Hairyplane’s argument, whether Shuttleworth is to your aeronautical taste or not, it is the jewel in the crown of British aircraft preservation. Owning an outstanding fleet of aircraft which it will still be operating many, many years from now.

There are several reasons for this; Firstly being an educational trust rather than a private collection, the loss of one individual will not bring about its demise (have you ever wondered what will happen to say The Fighter Collection after Stephen Grey?).

In addition Shuttleworth do their work in house, thus preserving the necessary skills, and have the backing of the industrial giants so noticable by their absence from the VTTS campaign (ie. BAe’s Anson and Cirrus Moth). More resource would certainly permit Old Warden to do an even better job, educaionally, ensuring greater continuity of skills and plugging gaps in collection with more outstanding replicas such as the ‘late production’ Sopwith Triplane.

Unfortunately the Shuttleworth collection peters out after the Second World War. So I would argue that a second organisation along similar lines is needed to preserve our postwar aviation heritage (if only because it would need an airfield with a suitable for jets). Luckily there is already a potential nucleus for such a collection in the shape of Air Atlantiques historic flight, and I sincerely hope that there are plans to ensure its long term future. Again this is totally dependent upon adequate funding.

Accepting that funding will always be the limiting factor for preserving aircraft in an airworthy condition, the Vulcan debacle comes down to the following – £1.2m for one Vulcan that attends perhaps 10 shows a year or a fleet of perhaps Meteor, Vampire, Candberra, Hunter, Dakota, Islander etc etc which has the same longevity as Shuttleworth. I know which I’d choose.

Steve.

Hi,

Now that really would be a worthwhile appeal – Passengers to the DC6! we could all pledge a small amount of money to fund the ‘modifications required to the aircraft to satisfy CAA requirements,’ and then one of the DC6s could carry us all to and from airshows thus ensuring its future.

Beats a Vulcan anyday, Steve.

PS. and remember G-APSA already has an Air Transport (Passenger) C of A.

Lets put it this way I’m an average bloke, average wage, average mortgage etc etc. In a normal year I expect to spend about £200-250 on aviation.

For that I expect to get; 1 or 2 magazines a month, a couple of decent books, attend Shuttleworth and one other airdisplay and hope fully get a pleasure flight in something interesting.

So if I was to donate twice my annual aircraft budget what would I get; if I was really lucky perhaps I’d see a Vulcan fly once a year – more likely a sickening feeling that I’d wasted my hard earned cash……

These people should get real………….

Steve

So £500 is not much?

To most people in this country £500 represents a sizeable chunk of their annual disposable income; say their summer holiday.

And to find 2000 people by the end of August (ie. the next fortnight) is just plain unrealistic.

More evidence of this entire projects extreme niavity, I rest my case.

Steve.

I really do think that the finacially niave day dreams that have driven this project to date should be put aside and we should look at it objectively; the pledges are just a drop in the ocean compared with the finances required and even if it did fly, and that is a huge if, I suspect that a sponsor will not be forthcoming.

Personally as much as I would love to see a Vulcan fly, there are far more important things that the money could have been spent on, which would benefit far more people in a tangible way. And we should remember here that the only interest the overwhelming majority of the population have in aviation is flying to the sun for their holidays.

But if we must spend some of the lottery pot on aviation can I suggest we give all year four pupils a flight over their home town, so that they can better appreciate the world they live in and hopefully be inspired by the wonder of flight, to be the next generation of aviation enthusiasts.

I appreciate that if you have contributed whether financially or in other ways the collapse of this project willl hurt. But unfortuanately we have all been hurt at some time, thats life, and this upset is hardly comparable with much of the hardships that life throws at most people during their life times.

Steve

Ah But Moggy have allowed for inflation?

Steve

I seem to remember reading that there were no drawings available and that this was impeeding the rebuild. Is this true?

Steve.