Just like all projects, this one had to have transition phases. Restoration to flight to grounded. It seems that the last part which will/should be the longest phase was ill thought out. The vast amount of money spent should have seen an exit plan to preservation that was more realistic and sustainable. Going back to the lottery funding initialisation the after flight phase seemed to be better defined. The last flight and ultimate location seemed hurried and doomed to failure. Sad stuff. £200k to move it into temporary storage is huge amount dreamed of by many museums. It’s current location is not good for a final destination. Sure the current airport management might be happy, but they would be wouldn’t they as the Vulcan would be housed in rented accommodation. But any expansion plans could leave the Vulcan in the cold. What I’m trying to say and failing is that whilst getting the Vulcan flying was great, it’s long term future looks bleak. They did not plan retirement well at all. It could be argued that the residual Vulcan effect could have been used to secure a permanent owned home. Which was what I thought the original plan?
Whilst on lottery grants, how many times have we seen vast amounts of money spent on projects, not just aviation, where the original submission placed great onus on improving public access/benefit/affordability when in reality it did not deliver? Has the vast amount spent on ballet and opera made it cheaper for the public.
The ultimate sadness would be to see the Vulcan scrapped. Sure they ‘delivered’ a flying Vulcan, but it would be sad if their project management and leadership failed to deliver a post flight lasting educational exhibition which was the original submission.
Moving onto another flying project before securing the future of the Vulcan is poor IMHO.
Sign In
