🙁

‘Anybody who has been in the pay of such a military force, and by their silence and complicity has condoned such illegal and immoral actions while accepting a monthly bloodstained pay-packet , certainly won’t be considered for employment by us.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1258249/Company-boss-compares-troops-paedophiles-refusing-request-provide-jobs-soldiers.html#ixzz0iLp1j8ZI

I wouldn’t consider working for a company run by someone with those views thankyou, ex-squaddie or not. (I’m not but I sure as hell respect those who are)

How dare he.

Seaking over Hull while I was waiting to load, and a Merlin chucking out quite a bit of smoke. Not historic I know, but the Gazelle I saw just after heading north must count…

DOOOOMSTERS

Sorry mate but for some silly reason it really tickles me when you write DOOMSTERS in big like that! I haven’t been able to read it once on this thread without breaking into laughter! And yes I see your point… 😉

Until his posts were deleted I am sure he referred to “private exchanges” with Kath and lead us to infer that the two of you had been conducting moderately civilised exchanges. Clearly not.

I think our “friend” has a severely warped view of things and we are certainly better off without him. Sorry, if that’s personal, Mods, but possibly acceptable as we are discussing an ex-member.

As for this thread we are all hopeful that things really will get better and some are even optimistic.

And since our last exchanges policing and justice will be devolved next month so the Republican supporters really have got most of what they wanted out of Good Friday. The recalcitrant UUP will continue to cause problems and represent the feelings of a significant minority.

Well said. I had hoped lessons would be learned by said member and we could look forward to a civilised, intelligent, and informed debate between him and Kath (certainly get that from her side at least). Perhaps I was being too optimistic, or maybe naive in giving him the benefit of the doubt. He has disappointed but not surprised me on this, as Joey says there’s no place for such blinkered, extremist views here is there? Specially from someone incapable of comprehending why they’ve been asked to go away and think about what they say for a while. Personally I’d have left the post up to show just what sort of person the mods were dealing with.

Christ, what a lot of nay-saying! :rolleyes:

Hey I didn’t nay-say! The yeah-sayers (is that the opposite of nay-saying?) seem to have the upper hand actually! 🙂

Apparently they had problems with cracking in the wing spar attachments, I believe due to the ‘wrong sort’ of alloy being used, and unsuitability to low level ops. After 217’s spar failed inspection showed the whole fleet was similarly blighted, and repair was deemed unfeasably expensive. So sadly that was that, the structural problems were’t insurmountable, just seen as too expensive to fettle throughout the fleet at the time. I don’t know, but IIRC this decision was partly influenced by the Valiant being seen as a ‘less advanced’ aircraft than the Victor or Vulcan.
138 had Valiants at Wittering, I think they came in from Gaydon originally.
Any help?

603 has provided Vulcans 558 and 655 with parts, including engines in 655’s case, so I prefer to focus on the positive that at least the ‘live’ exhibits can still continue thanks to this aircraft.

That’s the only good to come out of this, at least the good works of the chaps who looked after 603 won’t be entirely flushed down the swanny by BAe.

Chox, I see you’re not willing to point fingers at which museums and organisations are, in your opinion, unable to sustain their Vulcans…?

The bridge was Winston Bridge, Co. Durham.

I go over that bridge quite often- God knows how they did that!