WH904David you claimed that the Shackleton was secure. It isn’t. The Museum Director states that they will leave the building. I said that the aircraft’s future appeared very uncertain and it was, even though the usual “experts” claimed I was talking nonsense. It was obvious to me at the time of my visit that all the aircraft had been virtually abandoned. Now we know why. One assumes that the Shackleton will go to Cosford but there is no hangar space for it. Heaven forbid it went to East Fortune – the last thing we need is a second Shackleton being “preserved” in that part of the world, only to be destroyed a few years later.
WH904Wyvern, it does make a difference because it would not have been part of the CAA-approved display routine. It would have presented n o risk because it would have been a simple straight and level flight, but the CAA would have required the departure from a normal display to have been practiced and approved, as usual. The CAA would have to make a judgement on the actions of a pilot who is undoubtedly far more experienced than they are, such is the absurdity of the CAA’s relationship with the Vulcan.
I think a lot of people hope that the last flight will include a roll of some sort but I’m pretty sure it isn’t going to happen because of the CAA. I guess Kevin Rumens might like to risk the wrath of the CAA if he’s proposing to hang-up his flying boots, but I doubt if he’d want the hassle. The sad aspect of this is that a half loop and roll off the top could certainly fall outside of the “aerobatic” category, given that it was precisely the manoeuvre that the aircraft was designed to perform, and a manoeuvre that it did perform many, many times.
WH904I guess that will be the key to all this. Either way, it will be social media that informs us of the last flight, whenever it is. Although I’ve had plenty to say about the way in which VTTS has deliberately kept some of the Vulcan’s flights and destinations secret over the years, they’ve had plausible excuses to support their actions. For the very last flight, I’m not sure that the situation is any different. If it really does start to look like a huge spectator event, they would be entitled to claim that they were obliged to keep the flight secret because of the logistics and costs of catering for all the spectators. I think most of us assume that even VTTS would not have the sheer nerve to hide the very last flight of such an iconic machine but I don’t think we should convince ourselves that the last flight is guaranteed to be publicised. Given the way that they have forged ahead with their plans to retire the Vulcan at Finningley, despite the fact that almost nobody supports this idea, suggests that VTTS will do whatever suits them, not us.
WH904Indeed, this is how TV is now. I know the mind-set of Channel 4 as I used to work for them. They’re now incapable of producing anything that is in any danger of taxing the viewer’s attention span, but they cannot grasp that it is possible to inform and entertain, and that the two aims are not mutually exclusive.
WH904So, we now know that my concerns were entirely valid…
David is absolutely right, this Shack is the least at risk of all the survivors and scaremongering over a bit of dust helps no-one. We know that there are plans to revitalise the current MOSI halls and the best thing would be to monitor that rather than make unfounded assumptions about what the museum may or may not intend to do.
Dust does not equal neglect
WebPilot, David and yourself were wrong. My assumptions were correct and were not unfounded at all. Dust does equal neglect.
WH904And there we have it – wonder if I’ll get any apologies from all the people who carped at my comments on here some weeks ago about the parlous state of the museum and the future of the Shackleton? I won’t hold my breath. It’s a sorry business but one could see it coming from a proverbial mile. So what future for the Shackleton? Off to Cosford I would hope but if it does, where will it go? If it is doomed to sit outside after having been preserved intact for so long it really will be a tragedy.
WH904I would be overjoyed if air shows would abandon commentators entirely. There’s always an opportunity for a perfectly informative printed show programme for anyone who wants to know what they’re looking at. The only spoken information required is an announcement of what is happening and when. The endless babble from self-appointed “experts” is tedious and unnecessary, and often very annoying. I really don’t have any interest in listening to some gas bag babbling-on about how magnificent something looks, or telling me what to think.
WH904I considered going to the event but I had a feeling that it wouldn’t be as good as it could have been. Surely, the event was a golden opportunity for a unique photograph of the Vulcan flying over the Shackleton, and yet the Vulcan crew maintained the usual respectful distance from the Shackleton, as I feared. Okay, we know the CAA rules are the reason behind this but surely a bit of effort and goodwill could have produced a solution for exceptional circumstances. One low flypast approaching from directly behind the Shackleton would have produced an image that would have endured for years, without even the slightest safety risk to anyone. Seems like an opportunity wasted to me.
WH904I’m not the only person who has asked what the point was in gathering so many aircraft together when the most I (and most people) saw in the air together was eight. Nice though the idea was, it all seemed rather pointless.
WH904Last I heard the “farewell tour” was still being planned but no details as to precisely when or where it will take place. I assume there will be another “farewell farewell” flight some time after that, but as to when the very last flight will actually happen is anybody’s guess. I assume that VTTS don’t even know yet. What does concern me is what the final flight will actually be. Where will the flight embrace and what happens when XH558 gets back to Finningley? Will there be one final display, and if so, where and to what audience? As ever, there seems to be no possibility of anyone being allowed access to the airport site, therefore the very last touch-down is only going to be visible from outside the airfield. Not too bad if the wind direction is from the north (so that the landing is made from the Bawtry end of the runway where it can be seen, albeit through a fence) but the more usual wind direction means the landing will probably be at the opposite end of the airfield, where the view is rather poor to say the least. There’s also no indication of how the countless spectators will be accommodated, even though there have already been some ridiculously difficult days where police enforcement of parking has caused mayhem. I shudder to think what the situation will be like on what will doubtless be the busiest day of all. I can’t help thinking that the end of the last flight (which will of course be a very significant event in the history of the RAF and aviation history in general) is going to be a rather muted affair that most people will not even be able to see without a lot of difficulty. Seems like a very great shame that such an important event is likely to be such a shabby affair. My darkest fear is that VTTS will attempt to withhold the precise day/time of the last flight in order avoid all of these problems. If they do, I think there’s likely to be a lynch mob gathering at their hangar! 🙂
WH904The Channel 4 programme made me yearn for the late Raymond Baxter. Wouldn’t it have been nice to have had someone who knew what he was looking at, and had something intelligent to say… O’Leary spent most of the time telling us how exciting it was (which is generally a sign that something isn’t exciting) and asking how everything felt. The “historian” with him (name escapes me) seems to appear on every available programme now, spouting whatever he’s read in a book the night before. It looked as if the TV team had simply turned-up with a microphone, a “talking head historian” and hoped that an interesting programme would somehow appear as if my magic. Great to see the aircraft of course but it was typical modern-day television rubbish. I commented as the programme ended that any typical viewer would be just as clueless about the Battle of Britain after the show than they were before.
WH904Just in case nobody points-out the obvious, the markings on WV666 as shown above are complete fiction. The size and font are both completely wrong. WW397 is spot-on however, although the Light Aircraft Grey finish on the first photo is incorrect. Some Provosts were finished in LAG but these were later examples with fluorescent orange trim (notably the CATCS examples). The earlier examples with yellow trainer bands were sprayed silver. 🙂
WH904Cpt Brown seems to have seen an attempt at a loop
This week’s received wisdom from the media is that it is, in fact, called a “Loop the Loop”… I’m adding it to my files next to “Jump Jet” 😉
WH904Thing is, I wouldn’t be upset by the absence of “high energy” aerobatics. Personally I’d rather see a warbird up close, and if that means a simple, straight fly-by then that’s fine. My worry is that the CAA’s idea of a simple fly-by probably involves being so far away from the spectators that it can’t be seen. Maybe (and I’m not holding my breath) the CAA might consider it more reasonable to allow aircraft to be a tad closer to the spectator providing that they are not pointing towards the crowd and that they are doing nothing other than flying in a straight line? I’d be very happy with that but I’m old enough and cynical enough to know that it isn’t going to happen. The CAA are unlikely to make things better for show-goers, just worse. I find their attitude quite bizarre (as usual). They claim that their rules are carefully considered and yet they issue a knee-jerk response to the media which, by definition, suggests that their rules were therefore not adequate. That’s the only conclusion that can be drawn from this kind of instant response. Reacting “on the hoof” is the kind of approach that politicians employ, and one that everyone deplores. Can’t help thinking the CAA should have had the wisdom to avoid feeding the media and simply placed a temporary grounding on Hunters pending investigation. That’s all they needed to do and that’s all they should have done.
http://www.aeroplaneicons.com
Twitter/Aeroplaneicons
WH904The losses were very high, but the cause of the losses was often a result of the Luftwaffe’s training set-up that was inadequate. Likewise, the Luftwaffe had an awful lot of Starfighters, therefore the loss rate has to be measured against this figure too. Ultimately, the Starfighter was no more dangerous or unreliable than any other contemporary aircraft, but the media got hold of the subject and the reputation stuck.
Sign In
