I suggest you ask Duxford that question. 😉

We spend way too much on types that are too many flying the Spitfire is too much and everytime when one goes up it ends up crashing at some point.

Older aircraft should stay on the ground and be saved

Er, ok.

Classic Air Force collect British types, as do the Duxford Aviation Society. Therefore the TriStar falls out of their remit. I’ve already explained why the RAF Museum didn’t take one.

Quite frankly, jet airliners (unless they are delta-winged with a point at the front) are of little or no interest to the public at large, and large ones such as the TriStar take up a huge amount of space, and are a big commitment to take care of long-term. As such they are not attractive to museums to take on. We’ve already seen what happened to the BA collection at Cosford.

I’ve also explained that the RAF Museum want to take a VC-10 to Cosford, so I don’t understand your comment of ‘we lost the RAF Museum aircraft.’

So you’re saying that we should cut funding to our armed forces even further, and cut down on building much-needed new homes, in order to fund a bunch of rotting airframes which are only of interest to a handful of anoraks?

Where would the RAF Museum put one? The runway at Cosford has been declared as being too short to safely take a large type like the TriStar or VC-10, and the Museum are already trying to find the funding to dismantle, transport and re-assemble a VC-10, a huge and costly undertaking.

Why would IWM Duxford want one? They are in the process of getting rid of airframes (over 20 in the past few years) or hiding them away (Shackleton), the last thing they need right now is another white elephant.

As a type, the TriStar is not interesting enough to the public to be a big draw to attendances at either collection.

Given the RNHF’s record over the past decade or so, of being unable to field a single aircraft for much of the time, and aircraft of much less complexity than the Sea Vixen at that, this move would not seem to bode well for the aircraft’s future airworthiness. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who have funded it and kept it flying on the display for the past 14 or so years. 🙁

I suspect that the scope of the work required will mean that it it will take quite a few years to carry it out, from whenever they start. Before they start they will presumably need to have the necessary CAA approvals to carry out restorations in place, obtaining these approvals is no mean task in itself. Therefore I wouldn’t be holding my breath if I were you Charlie, absolute best case would still be quite a few years away yet.

They do flypasts and displays by request, depending on bookings and routings. If there is a scarcity of bookings in a particular area, it is because display organisers in that area didn’t book them, or there were no displays in that area while the CWHM Lancaster is here. Simples! Why not more time at YAM? Probably because YAM didn’t have an event on at the time or weren’t prepared to part with the ££££ necessary to book them.

There isn’t much to tell TBH. ‘Just Jane’ sat idling on the far side of the field while the two Lancasters made a total of 4 flypasts overhead at 500 feet. Nice to see, but probably not worthy of all the hype that has been built up around it IMO.