Ah, there you go……giving an impression of what’s going on and stating the hard facts are very different matters ๐
This is the piece I read earlier on the TVOC site;
”Another thing that the TVOC staff have been going through is training on their quality system and procedures, which they will be following when they come to operate the aircraft throughout the summer season before going back to MA for winter base maintenance.”
To my understanding, based on this information anyway, TVOC engineers, once trained will be getting some kind of approvals from Marshalls to certify work on the Vulcan.
Now either they have been training or they havenโt.
If it is the latter (as you are suggesting) then I would be really interested to hear your evidence.
Co-incidently the very reason why TVOC can’t operate it……no one qualified to :rolleyes: and why they need so much money to fly it again, ‘cos they will need to pay MA upfront to do so…. ๐ก
I am not sure if this statement is correct. It is certainly not the impression I got after reading the February Engineering update on the TVOC website.
Glad to see it go myself, I hate the blooming things ๐
Should answer the questions, from the NTSB accident report;
”The pilot performed “a low pass” over the runway, and then touched down approximately 1,000 feet beyond the approach end of the 2,948-foot long runway, with a tailwind of approximately 10 knots. After touchdown, the airplane continued off the end of the runway, and subsequently impacted water. According to the Cessna 525A Landing Distance Chart, an airplane with a landing weight of 11,400 pounds required 3,000 feet of landing distance, in a no wind situation. With a 10 knot tailwind, the airplane required 3,570 feet of landing distance. The published airport diagram for the airport, was observed attached to the pilot’s control column after the accident. A notation, which read, “airport closed to jet aircraft” was observed on the diagram. Additionally, the same notation, “Arpt CLOSED to jet traffic,” was observed in the FAA Airport/Facility Directory. Examination of the airplane revealed no mechanical deficiencies.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot’s improper decision to plan a flight to a runway of insufficient length, his improper in-flight decision to land on that inadequate runway with a tailwind, and his failure to obtain the proper touchdown point. A factor in the accident was the tailwind condition.”
The article Paul F refers to can be found here, as he said quite a good read.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/main.jhtml?xml=/property/2008/01/27/pbattle127.xml
What are you doing Joe – starting such rumours!!
Can’t see it on their aircraft list … http://www.newarkairmuseum.org/aircraftlist.htm
I wasn’t aware I was starting any rumours.
All I said was it is a shame it’s not on display at Newark, for people to see rather than it sitting in a barn out of public view.
The best place would be to see it in the air, but as VX pointed out that ain’t likely to happen.
Very succinctly put Bruce.
Hell hath no fury as a vested interest masquerading as a moral crusade.
Bottom-line whatโs best for the aircraft?
Sitting in a warehouse slowly deteriorating or being restored and put on display for people to enjoy – no matter where in the world that might be.
Its a shame Newark couldn’t get hold of it on loan, at least people would be able to see it.
Its a big old brute when you stand next to it!
Old Austers never die…. nice to see this one rescued from the brink.:)
The film company have used Little Snoring Airfield a couple of times. The first episode, about the brothers competing with each other in the burger vans, was shot on the peri-track.
It is a shame about this series, on paper it sounds good, (location, characters etc), however in reality have to agree with pagen01 it aint great.
Still they have chucked a couple of quid the clubs way each time they use the airfield, so perhaps shouldn’t complain.
Here is the thread where they forced entry to the 747…….
http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=13317&highlight=bruntingthorpe
John.
Is this the correct thread? You mention in your previous post that they broke in at ”nightime and forced entry to the 747”. This thread appears to be a visit during a Sunday daytime. I can’t see where there is any mention about breaking in to the 747 either.:confused:
And of course it’s never been know that aircraft spotters have ever wondered around hangars and restrcited area’s without permission. :diablo:
I seem to remember Commander Straker (of Moonbase Alpha) emerging from a Jetstream ‘C10A’ at Radlett during an episode of ‘UFO’.
I’am rather anoyed that I can remember that. :rolleyes:
It was hangared and operating out of Norwich two or three weeks ago.
Given the landing fees there ๐ฎ I can assume this was only temporary.
Thats really rather good.
I thought the new website was a bit short on pictures, but this feature more than makes up for it.:)