RocketeerAllright. Fooled by the title of the movie on the website and the vokes-filter. I should have taken a closer look before posting 😮 . Thanks.
Tillerman.
However, the bloke is most certainly not in a Hurricane cockpit!! It has a Mk1 or 2 MB ejection seat for a start! The windscreen is all wrong too. I think its a Meteor
RocketeerCheers Scotavia, I knew about the P40s…I have a piece of a H75 that’s all
RocketeerCheers for that, at least I know that it’s fairly historic.
Indeed, funnily enuff one of Hunter cockpits needs a mirror still!
RocketeerI don’t recognise it as a Spitfire mirror but isn’t H.A. Hawkers?
Regards
Michael
Yes, it is Hawker Hunter, ironically mounts inside the canopy! 🙂
RocketeerWell, as luck would have it I’m off to visit QinetiQ in Malvern tomorrow so I’m delighted to have been warned how hopeless they are before going. :rolleyes:
Seriously, I think Rocketeer is right (and he should know 😉 ) – this pointless, jibbering nonsense should be removes asap.
My annoyance is the inference in Alertken’s posting that those failings are down to that company and its predecessors…this is total pap and not based on one jot of evidence or commonsense and MarkG I am disappointed that you should believe that that company are ‘hopeless’
Places like that company and its constituent parts (and predecessors) have striven to try and get the most out of the forces kit and give the widest possible envelopes. This dates back to the birth of the RAF in the case of A&AEE. Independent assessment is essential to ensure value for money for the taxpayer, fitness for purpose and safety for the end user.
An analogy,
if you bought a car from a big manufacturer and it broke down all the time, would you blame the RAC or AA who come and fix it?! The release you get is only as good as the item you are given to assess. If the car manufacturer said a car could do 80 mpg would you believe them or try it out yourself.
So Alertken, back up your findings or withdraw.
I will no longer post on this thread. All I ask is that you all be fair and informed before posting drivel that can offend or be misunderstood. That goes for all posts on any subject.
As this thread is harmful to people’s livelihoods I ask that it be withdrawn.
The above thoughts are my personal thoughts on behalf of me.
RocketeerNick…very similar to a Hurricane. The oval hole in the middle serves two purposes, one for the Sutton Harness strap and also the control locking gear pokes through it. Obviously the seat tray is for the seat type chute as Cees says. It appears to be missing some of the channel strengthening on the back
RocketeerRocketeer is the Spade Grip guru!
How about a pic of your collection….did you see Guy Blacks lot on ‘warplane’ on C5…..coooooo!
YY
Will try to find one….not as big a collection as 682al though!!! 😀
RocketeerQinetiq embraces much of UK’s military Aero Acceptance Authority. The turn likely to be taken by Frank Carlucci’s Carlyle Group, selling so soon after investing, is justified by Ministers by their having purged a culture of timelessness. Let us hope that’s not all they’ve expelled. It would be unfair to mention Albemarle, Botha, Buckingham, Lerwick, Welkin or (first) Whirlwind, so I won’t. I won’t dwell on Belfast, Seamew MR.2, or Swift F.1: this is all behind us now. Let’s stay with Systems-intensive devices, and let’s hear it for:
1. Blue Steel, eventually given low-level Release, but never credible in QRA mode – says Wynn’s Official History. This weapon was built by Avro, but was the creature of RAE/RPE/RSRDE, who seldom talked to each other. If the fuel didn’t get you, the battery did;
2. Violet Club, UK’s first H-Bomb, deployed late-58, withdrawn early-59 as USSR’s secret weapon, hazarding Rutland;
3. Red Beard, UK’s tactical nuke, never cleared for low-level release, thus bringing Buccaneer S.1 up nicely into Sverdlovsk sights;
4. RAE Bedford’s 20 years on Blind Landing Leader Cable:dug into Brize Norton, never utilised.
In mitigation, Air was not alone: not only PTR377 or Clansman, but any UK radio, ever; RN piracy to replace issued optics with loot from U-Boats; any UK torpedo – Conqueror’s Captain as he stalked Belgrano changed brand-new Marconi/AUWE Tigerfish for Westinghouse, 1927-designed: he spoke of his need for “confidence”. Nor did UK have a monopoly Approving the unworthy:
USSR: Sputnik’s launcher, withdrawn as ICBM within months; Galosh ABM, withdrawn when they realised that first detonation would EMP-blank the rest of the salvo.
US: Davy Crockett atomic SSM: range 2km, radius of lethality: 2.5km; Snark nuclear SSM: withdrawn 4 weeks after deployment; B-2, Released after 20 years’ gestation, grounded (briefly) one week later after the Sqd. first flew in rain and lit up everyone’s scopes.
More, please – not ghastly designs, as in World’s Worst books, but inept Releases.
What is this about? Is it a troll? If it is I suggest it is removed by a moderator
RocketeerAH I give up!!
If whoever buys this nose section is looking for donations or somone to drive the lorry please e.mail me on [email]lankytim@hotmail.com[/email].
Seeyaaaa!!!!
Lankytim come and spend a weekend with the Cockpiteers at Newark in June at CockpitFest….you will find all you ever wanted to know (and probably alot more you didnt!) 🙂
RocketeerHERE HERE!! Someone talking some bloody sense! What about that Mr Burke? I’m sure you’ll have an argument for this…
:rolleyes:
Interesting watching this thread develop. Basically you are all right to a certain extent. You also agree on a lot, let me illustrate:-
1. Vulcans and other ‘preserved’ airframes should be undercover wherever possible.
2. An aircraft outside needs more up keep
3. Groups have limited funds
4. Groups have limited volunteers of the GUAGV (Get Up and Go Variety)
5. The Vulcan’s last owner was not the easiest chap to buy things off
6. XL391 has gone in wholesome form (incidentally Dave from NZ – this shows how saving a complete aircraft is difficult compare to a nose section).
7. The marine environment is not nice to airframes…period. That is not rubbish it is true.
For those that do not think Mr Burke is a preservationist, well you clearly don’t know him. He has been instrumental in saving more aircraft and artefacts than 99.9% of you have had hot dinners!
For the record, The IWM wrote a superb paper (Chris Chippington) on conserving large airframes, which should be good reading to all involved.
The Vulcan has main spars that are visible externally and the exfoilation/inter granular corrosion I have seen can be easily be made to look better than it actualy is. The nose leg castings can have critical stress in them which leads to cracking (we have an example of this on our Scimitar nose leg).
I believe, unless things have changed and it is due to go inside in the near future, Newark have an enlightened preservation plan for their Vulcan that does not see it being whole in the longer term.
To sum up, yes I suggested 23 years ago that saving lots of Vulcans was not such a good idea. The heartache of watching them being cut up by diggers like dinosaurs ravishing a carcass is horrible. I would do all within my power to save them, but I cannot do it all by myself. I have to be realistic and know my weaknesses and limitations.
If this thread has done nothing more than make you debate the sad end to this airframe and made just one person decide to join an aviation preservation group or museum, then it will not have all been in vain.
RocketeerOlympus Swan – If you surf the net you will find a document from various groups proposing a museum at Filton and going into the costings of doing so. That plan is still underway and if it happens it will be good for the area. The Concorde there is well looked after and hopefully it will get a roof over it’s head shortly. The Manchester Concorde comes within the same description but what plans there are for a hangar remain to be seen. Whether we actually need to preserve the number of Concordes
there are in the U.K remains to be seen and if it diverts funds away from other aircraft
that need money spending on them is that for the best? Some would argue that they would rather see funds spent on securing the long term future of the Cosford Boeing 707 than a duplicated Concorde.
As for preservation groups – the vast majority of groups have grasped the nettle
and either started fund raising for hangars or have done so already. There are a great number of realists around and the huge expansion in terms of numbers of aircraft preserved are very much a thing of the past. So no, effort spent in rescuing airframes is not wasted – however rescuing them is a very small part of the cost. Ensuring their long term future is expensive and in many ways this should concentrate the mind on
what is viable . Here is an interesting paragraph from 1983 :‘I also worry about ‘Vulcan Fever’ I know it is a nice aircraft but why save so many in order for them to become as common as muck! We must save room for a couple of Canberras and the Jet Provost and other ‘aged’ aircraft that will be neglected by lack of space, due to all these Vulcans’
Written by a young Tony Dyer and published in FlyPast . Twenty three years later and the RAFM will be putting a Vulcan undercover at Cosford to duplicate the example at Hendon similarily undercover. Whilst this goes on we discuss the fate of the British Airways collection of significant airlines and the reserve collection including a rare
Valetta continue to slumber sight unseen. Preservation is about what to preserve but also what not to – endless duplication only waters it down for other projects.
You should have quoted the bit I said about looking after a Vulcan being like a ‘Forthbridge Archetype’!!
RocketeerOk, time for an update.
A public thanks to all those who’ve PM’d and those who’ve offered pledges also.
Just when we had begun to think everyones a keyboard enthusiast, we’ve pleasantly been proved wrong. 😀
Anyhow, the start of the working week tomorrow should dot the I’s and cross the T’s with the yard owner, and collection of Mr Rusty is pencilled in for the end of this month.
Two museums have kindly offered short term storage, and suffice to say one has been gladly accepted.
I’m not sure if the webmaster or anybody in ‘management’ is following all this (?), but wouldn’t it be just peachy if Flypast’s own forum became a news item in a few issue’s time ?
Cheers……..
.
This is great news!!!
RocketeerI was merely posing a question, nothing odd about it..! I would much prefer to see the said Spare! in its said place! on the aircraft…unfortunate that its an impossibility now…unfortunate also that its a sad fact certain people have little or no regard to protecting pieces of aviation history anymore, that people are more interested in flogging them to the highest bidder on ebay in the first place…and therefore does it make it right? Like you say who cares!
Unfortunate that some of us do I guess…..
Don’t make the mistake of thinking I don’t care! I have saved significant large lumps of aircraft (including Vulcans) to prove that I do! I hope the cockpit will live on and maybe an engine or four.
There are still wonderful relics out there to save. I still cannot believe that a cockpit of a Shack is out there. Mark my words, it will be saved if DaveT, myself and a few others have their way. Regards Tony D
RocketeerWhat are the rules on ebay for this if any? Can you make a profit from what you dont own? :confused:
odd turn this thread has taken! You are all discussing a piece of scrap that was probably given to the ebay vendor by the scrappy….who cares! buy it if you want, dont if you dont want it!
RocketeerDifficult choice….Seattle, or Nova Scotia or New Zealand
Sign In
