There’s no real contest – but you may be getting a bit confused, as the additional aircraft cockpit admission fee is just 50p each not a ‘quidditch!’ :diablo:

Not sure how much snow is going to be around at the weekend for those long sought after shots?? 😉

An update has been added about what cockpits will hopefully be open at Newark during the Half-Term Holiday Week (11 February to 19 February inclusive) – this includes the Shackleton, Canberra B(I)8 and Vulcan. Please remember new height restrictions are now being used to determine eligibility for cockpit access and also that a small additional fee is charge.

Also I would like to re-confirm that the date of Newark’s first Indoor Aeroboot Sale has been set for Saturday 3rd March 2012 and not the date of 29th April that was announced at last years’ event. Despite having personally sent emails and letter to all participants at the autumn event confirming this change of date the museum is still getting calls from confused Aerobooters.

I’m trying to recover the contact data from my old PC to send emails to everyone to confirm the spring 2012 date as being Saturday 3rd March 2012.

Details as normal can be found in here!

I would like to thank the last two posters for their detailed input – I think that I need to lie down in a dark room for a while! :confused:

I’m certainly worried for the wellbeing of the ‘spotters’ or whatever we agreed to call them!! 😉

I will make my colleagues at the museum aware of the comments and then try to come to an agreed ‘likely’ identity.

Thanks for the advice David – I have seen a copy of Ian’s written assessment, which errs towards XS238.

However the advice was not conclusive and refers to the possibility of the airframe having been – “……cobbled together an old, damaged fuselage to create XS238”

He also raised the possibility that “If it is XS238, then you are the owner of the first and last Mk.9!!”

I’m not sure whether he was privy to the above mentioned data plate information.

Apologies I should have further clarified post #5 – the location that both of you have described is where the two plates were found.

My understanding is that there may be some confusion due to … “its batch production number being some 6 years before its manufacture date on the serial plate” … as mentioned in some correspondence in its Archive File at the museum. :confused:

:rolleyes: I had a feeling that it was going to go like this – hence the separate thread!

At least it will stop certain ‘visitors’ asking where it’s stored!! 🙂