Paul FI was fortunate enough to hear Jim speak at a number of Shoreham Airport Association meetings, his tales of the various escapades and recoveries were full of humour, and also showed his dogged determination once he got the ‘sniff’ of something worth pursuing. Did he ever see the elusive Russian Stirling? I guess we will never know now, but I always got the sense that if anyone had got within touching distance of it, then it would have been Jim Pearce.
Many years ago the association was also fortunate enough to look around the hangar he used at Shoreham, and some of the odds and ends in there were real ‘one off’ items – like the canvas skin from Major Savage’s sky-writing SE5a, carrying the original registration letters.
Farewell Jim, and thanks for all you did for the historic aviation scene… blue skies, sir.
Paul FQuote from the Daily Mail article (underlining is mine ):
“In the image, Earhart has her back to the camera and is seen speaking to Noonan as they prepare to board a boat.”
Yet the photo printed clearly shows the woman in question looking in the completely opposite direction to the man they have circled…that’s a very odd way of ‘speaking to someone’……
Wonder why the journo used those particular words, rather than the more obvious interpretation that “In the image Earhart has her back to the camera and is waiting with Noonan as they prepare to board a boat…”
Can’t help but wonder why the supposed aircraft (looks like a Supermarine Attacker to me :dev2:) is still dangling from the ship’s stern, and has not been unloaded – unless of course, the photo was taken very soon after the ship arrived, and they land the rescued crew first, and unload the aircraft later, after that photo was taken….
I wonder where the ship’s log went, as I am sure the Officer of the Watch, or the Captain, would have recorded the rescue and recovery of a ditched/stranded aircraft and such a famous pilot. Can anyone track down the ship, and it’s Captain’s name, as I am sure he would have told his family about this..even if he didn’t see them for many months after the event.
And, given this seems to have happened soon after the likely forced landing (or Amelia had access to a local hairdresser who could maintain her unusual for the period hair style?), then why didn’t she make contact with ‘home’ form Jaluit before later vanishing… or was there a total lack of communications blackout (by sea, air, wireless, mail etc) between Jaluit Atoll and anywhere else between the date the photo was taken and the outbreak of hostilities. Or, is the suggestion perhaps that the Japanese took them prisoner on Jaluit, and then kept their celebrity prisoner under the radar, well before the outbreak of WW2?
Still, despite the doubts, this is perhaps a little more plausible, and slightly stronger evidence, than empty jars of face cream, shadows in coral reefs that look vaguely aircraft-like, a few fragments of aluminium and a shin bone or two.
Anyway, anyone want to fund an all expenses paid jolly, sorry, research trip, to the Jaluit Atoll..I’m sure there must be a jar or two of face cream to be found in the harbour…
Paul Fbut parts availability will clearly be critical.
So too will be large pot of cash….note to self: time to rattle the piggy-bank again and send a few spondoolies south westwards….
Even if the worst happens and CAA do decide to implement further new rules and regs that further curtail/severely restrict operation of complex historic aircraft, or the outcome of any possible legal proceedings relating to Shoreham cause operators to review the viability/costs of continuing to operate complex historics, I’d like to see the Sea Vixen repaired and looking fit to fly.
Good luck to all involved – you certainly deserve some, you’ve had more than your fair share of bad lack over the last few years.
Paul FYes, definitely a step forward, but I suspect we are still long way from the “near-zero cost” of renewables that many green advocates suggest…. they often forget to factor in all the materials and energy needed to manufacture, assemble, transport and then maintain all those photo-voltaic panels, wind turbines, cables and transformer/inverters throughout their lifespan.
All those precious metals in the solar panels, and all the resin and carbon fibre in those turbines have to have come from somewhere, and an awful lot of natural resource and energy has to be consumed to produce those starting materials form which to make those “energy collector” devices – it probably takes many years before any single collector device is in nett “energy profit” (i.e. has generated sufficient energy to repay that used to make it) – but no doubt as technology improves, then things will become more and more reliable and efficient.
We still have a long way to go, but I guess hitting 50%, even for just one day, is a significant milestone.
I’ll continue to do my bit by walking to work – it doesn’t recover much energy for anyone else, but at least it leaves the car on the driveway for another day, saving a few litres of fossil fuel 😉
Paul FDC-3 Dakota (BBMF example perhaps?) at 08:30 this morning, passing just to the north/east of Lewes town centre, heading southeast, just below the low cloudbase.
Paul FYes, it is in their Mechanical Engineering department workshop.
FYI they also had (and may still have?) a helicopter in the same workshop – IIRC a Westland Wasp – when my son was studying for his motorsport engineering degree there.
Not quite as impressive as the fact that Loughborough Uni had the somewhat newer BAe ‘EAP’ technology demonstrator in their engineering department at that time…
All were used as teaching/training aids, though in the case of the Coventry Harrier and the Scout they would be at least two generations behind the state of the art, but I guess a hands-on airframe, even if it is a little out of date, is better than nothing.
Paul F.. with only 4,000 ft from boundary to boundary on the display axis a 300 mph plus aircraft is never going to complete a display within a box equating to the airfield dimensions.
As Moggy has said, Shoreham is a very small display axis, and my impression, over many years attendance, was that many display aircraft seem(ed) to start or finish manoeuvers beyond the airfield boundaries – many such manoeuvres were clearly part of the “reversal” process, but most heavier types, or fast jets (even JPs from memory) could not keep their full displays within the airfield footprint, and towards the south-west the extended display axis has very little option but to fly over, or very close to developed areas, and to the north East, the busy A27, and two road junctions (one large one small) were ever present, along with the South Downs.
Given the lack of “undeveloped” land around the airfield, there is/was very little room for manoeuvre, and only very light, very slow, or very manoeuvrable aircraft stood any chance of remaining within the airfield boundary – as Moggy says even Shuttleworth displays would struggle to stay entirely within their airfield boundary, though Old Warden has the benefit that it is surrounded by largely unpopulated land, unlike Shoreham where there is very little unpopulated land around the airfield.
The display site map (included in the AAIB report IIRC) clearly shows the limited ‘free space” available to Shoreham display aircraft, with all the surrounding built up and “no over fly” zones leaving very little room for error. The run in from the southwest is very restricted, and even though the area at the other end of the dispaly axis (i.e. to north east) is less heavily populated, the presence of the South Downs, the A27, and Lancing college leave/left little room should things go badly awry.
Hindsight is wonderful, but it is clear that Shoreham airport was a less than perfect display venue – especially given the proximity of the coast, which would have offerred a far less restricted display axis, though the origins of the display (as a fund raiser for RAFA) probably meant that a seaside-display was never really an attractive option to the organissrs, as the opportunity to collect entry fees would be much reduced, and collecting buckets would probably never have raised so much money for RAFA over the years.
Again, with hindsight maybe past incidents at Shoreham, including a forced landing by a Beagle 206 with undercarriage problems (landed safely on the runway at end of the dispaly albeit with one main gear retracted), a forced landing immediately after engine problems on take-off by a Harvard (ended up landing on its gear without major damage in a field on the north eastern side of the A27/Coombe Road junction), and the fatal crash of the Hurricane on the South Downs a few years ago, might perhaps have lead to a more circumspect review of “worst case “what if..?” scenarios. But hindsight is a wonderful thing.
The 2015 display organisers assessed risks in accordance with the then pertaining CAA regulations, and CAA ultimately authorised/approved the display site, there were signs and (I understand) staff on hand to try to move A27 pedestrians on, plus fences to help block the view of the runway (again in hope of discouraging bystanders). But, ultimately, none of those things prevented fatalities among those outside the display site’s official/designated crowd area.
Unfortunately, in today’s risk-averse culture where few people seem willing to take responsibility for their own actions, it is often all too easy to point the finger at the failings of others.
Sadly, many, many ‘holes in the cheese’ lined up that day, with tragic results.
Paul F
Had the road junction been clear of pedestrian spectators the number of fatalities would, undoubtedly, have been fewer, but given some of those killed were simply using the A27 to go about their legitimate (non-airshow related) business, I suspect the AAIB report would still read much the same?
Paul FPotentially good news, indeed, but also the risk that if the space is more accessible by road, then “the commercial development” that occurs over time may not necessarily be of on aviation nature.
The owners of the land could quickly find it more commercially attractive to use/rent/sell it as a space for new commercial premises, which might quickly multiply and encroach upon, and eventually cover, the area needed for a viable airfield/airport.
Living just teh otehr side of Brighton, and tending to view Shoreham as my “local airfield”, I’ll keep an open mind, but I cannot help but see the area as prime territory for new building – whether for commercial uses, or for residential redevelopment of the brown-field site, or for a combination of both.
The airfield site is conveniently close to the Brighton/Shoreham/Lancing connurbation, close to Worthing, and with improved access to the A27 if the proposed roundabout/junction goes ahead, it becomes even “closer” to both A23 or A24 heading north towards M25 and on into London. Of course, that degree of “ease of access to A24 depends on whether or not the current A27 ‘bottleneck’ between the airport and the A24 ever gets a much needed bypass.
Which is more attractive to the landowner in the longer term, potentially lucrative space for sale or lease for houses/jobs for “the many”, or ongoing use as an “aviation playgound” for the richer “few”, in a time when Governmment is applying pressure for new homes to be built every year?
Wish I could be more positive, but……
Paul FIf it all gets binned is there any material which could be harmful to the environment when it ends up in landfill?
That’s taking environmental concerns to a whole new level 91Regal, I am most impressed, most of us would probably simply have shredded, burnt, or binned them without a thought.
Presumably any “risks” would be the inks/colour compounds left on the prints, and likewise the colour compounds left on finished negative strips or transparencies.
However, as the vast majority of the mass of a printed photo is the paper itself (cellulose, clay and possibly some whitening agent like titanium dioxide – all likely to breakdown without any concerns), and the vast majority of the mass of a negative strip or transparency is gelatin(e) (apart from any glass or plastic in a transparency mount), then unless you are dumping photo prints and negatives on an industrial scale I would think the environmental impact is pretty small – but I stand to be corrected if others know better.
As others have said, burning them, or shredding them would prevent subsequent retrieval and mis-use – but burning them in large quantities may also release any “nasties” into the atmosphere, or concentrate any non-volatile nasties in the ash residue, whereas dumping in their original (albeit shredded) form would dlute any nasties, and perhaps release them more slowly as the paper/gelatin breaks down over time.
I wonder if “composting” prints and negatives (or unmounted transparencies) might work given they are mainly degradable materials? Or why not recycle (shredded) prints via paper-recycling collections etc?
Let us know what you find out, as I am sure many of us keen-amateur snappers face the same problem at some stage…. or our kids will face it when they clear out after we shrug of this mortal toil…
Paul FI would like to give a big thank you to all those involved in giving me and others, so much enjoyment over the years.
I will treasure the memories of seeing her fly, for many years to come.
Yep, me too, but I still cannot help but think the lack of planning a seemingly sustainable “end game” for ‘558 in her retirement risks taking the gloss off their engineering achievements to date? As has been said, the final chapters of the VTTS plan always seemed to stretch the imagination in terms of chances of a successful outcome, even more so than the continued operation of her (against all the odds) as a flying example…
No one could fault the logic behind why they chose Finningley/Robin Hood in terms of access to hangar space (in short term at least)and runway servicability for the hoped for fast runs etc, it was the funding (and likely issues with commercial pressure on hangar space/runway time) of keeping her on a live airport that was harder to understand.
I haven’t followed progress on the ‘engineering academy’ side of the VTTS retirement plan – has that training organisation actually got off the ground yet (pardon the pun) i.e. with students and apprentices already undergoing teaching, or does it still only exist as a plan for the future? With a move to smaller hangar, and need to fit out the new smaller building before it can be used, I fear the delay may hinder any chances of getting the academy up and running in a sustainable fashion? I doubt many prospective trainees/students will gamble on booking a place at a non-existent but “coming soon” seat of learning if they can find an established college/tech already offering the same course on an established campus?
I wish I could be more positive, as I feel the engineers who put in the hours restoring/maintaining her, and the public and benefactors who funded her return, deserve better than to hear/read so many negative comments, but it is what it is, and they can and should be proud of what they achieved up to the point that she was ‘retired’ to the hangar.
The responsibility for lack of a suitably robust game-plan to ensure her longevity in retirement probably lays elsewhere within VTTS?
Paul FNow that XH558 is grounded it has the same significance as XM655 at Wellesbourne and XL426 at Southend.
Based on the fact that, as I understand it, many systems were removed etc as part of the return to flight, it might be argued that, apart from being the “Last flying Vulcan” and as such an example of dogged determination to overcome the naysayers, she may actually be historically less significant than the more “operationally representative” examples at Wellesbourne and Southend?
Yep, hats off to all who helped get her back into the air, but the ‘end-game’ was always the seemingly less well thought-through aspect of the whole enterprise. If VTTS could not meet their goals in terms of income from hangar utilisation post-grounding, then they should be asking whether “downsizing” will really make much difference. Large or small, perhaps it is the location as a whole that is the problem in terms of attracting income from “Vulvcan hangar” rentals. Unknown income, and the threat that hangar space on a live airport was always at risk of being in demand for other enterprises that would generate more cash income for the airport owners….it never made for a sound business plan.
Wherever ‘558 ended up, her long-term preservation exposed to the elements would be a major challenge, but use of hangar space on a live airport, whilst welcome, was always going to be at risk of being withdrawn, or of facing increasing rental costs due to commercial pressures.
Maybe she should have gone to Elvington alongside the Victor (from memory they don’t have a Vulcan there?), or back to Brunty, but I don’t think either of those locations has available hangar space at peppercorn rent either. However, they may have been less problematic in terms of availability of runways for “fast taxi-runs” etc, whoch may have generated income for VTTS, and kept her in the public eye a little more. From memory I don’t think ‘558 has moved under her own power since her final taxi-in at Finningley has she – I don’t recall seeing news of any fast taxi runs t Finningley in the media?
I wish them well in the new, smaller, hangar, but cannot help but wonder how sound/secure that move will prove to be in the longer term.
Paul F
– Presumably the newly restored Supermarine Swift will be relocated to a new indoor site somewhat sooner than ‘558?
I hope so, we can afford to lose ‘558 to corrosion (we do, after all, have a number of other Vulcans in UK museums/collections etc), but IMHO the long term preservation of that Swift is more important.
(Ducks and runs for cover)
Paul F– did anyone watch it?
Yes, I did. A fairly predictable 2016 season race, and boring up until the point that Hamilton started to slow down, to try to put Vettel and Verstappen within striking distance of Rosberg, at that point it was much more entertaining..would Rosberg try and catch/pass Hamiltion, would Vettel (and Verstappen) manage to get past Rosberg etc?
Yes Ham did ignore, and/or argue with, team orders, but why not? It was his only chance of retaining the Championship, and any other driver would probably have done the same in his circumstances. At least he had the b*lls to ignore the team’s orders, many drivers would just have meekly obeyed, and the race would have been a predictably boring McL 1/2 as a result.
Yes, the outcome was (eventually) still the same, a predictable McL 1/2, and Hamilton lost his championship, but at least the last 15 – 20 mins racing were more exciting to watch…
So, no UK champion for the start of next season, Jenson Button gone (always seemed to be a very popular “Brit”), and probably even fewer live F1 races being shown on UK Terrestrial TV… I suspect F1 will fade even further from the wider UK-public’s interest next year, especially if any one team starts/continues to dominate all the early races again.
Still, Mr E and his acolytes have trousered a fortune to date, so what does he care if UK interest is lost, no doubt he has eyes on the (supposedly) more lucrative emerging markets for ‘mobile advertising hoarding’ races in Eastern Europe and Middle East.
In UK I suspect the motor sport formulae with less predictable results such as Touring Cars (BTCC) may quickly attract larger audience figures.
Paul FFirstly I save (copy/paste) copies of the memory card files onto a stand alone hard drive (HD) (now a set of HDs), where I later tidy and edit them and then treat that HD as my “presentable album” of images that I feel are worth viewing again, sharing or showing others etc.
Secondly I then I transfer (Cut/paste) the ‘original’ image files off the memory cards onto a second stand alone HD, where I do not bother to edit them at all – this second HD (in reality a set of HDs) then serve as ultimate ‘back up’ copies should the editted/tidied HD copies ever be corrupted/lost etc. I too find it difficult to “delete” even the poorest images completely, so they hang around on my back-up (aka “originals” HDs) forever, whereas the presentable HDs only holds photos worth showing to others etc.
In both cases I simply file the newly copied/transferred images on each HD in a series of folders indexed by year, and then sorted into sub folders within the relevant year folder giving each subfolder a tile of yymmdd and a brief description (e.g. “161022 Shobdon airfield” or “151225 Christmas Day home with family”). Windows then automatically sorts each year’s folder into chronological order (by file name description). I accept this approach means I cannot easily find a particular image (or images of say the same eaircraft taken at differnt times across the years) unless I have an idea when/where I took the photo, but, to be honest, I have never found that to be an issue.
Fortunately I have followed this approach since I first started to dabble in digital back in 2004, as it would be real nightmare to have to sort a mass of I guess 250,000+ otherwise “jumbled” files taken over last 12 years, though windows can still help if you set the folder view to ‘details’, and then click on the header for the ‘date/time’ column, as it sorts all files in that folder (regardless of file name or suffix) into date/time order (assuming camera opertaing system was set to correct date/time when any photo was taken), after which you can easily cut/paste similarly dated sets of files into a new folder if you so choose.
To date I am running at about 5 stand alone HDs, but prefer the security of having my copies stored locally, rather on a nebulous “cloud based system” simply because I know that I have no need to rely on an internet connection to view them. So long as I have a PC/laptop and the relevant HD I can view them regardless of internet connectivity or speed etc. If I feel I may want to view them when I have no access to my stand alone HDs I can, of course, still copy files onto a cloud server such as Drop box, or share them with family and friends via social media of Photobucket etc, but I love the security of knowing I still retain “acess” to my photos even if the web or ISP falls apart one day.
My approach to filing also means that all files taken on the same day are stored in one folder together, even though they may have been taken on, and downloaded from, many different memory cards or from multiple cameras I was using on that day.
As portable memory is becoming ever cheaper, I guess it is not all that expensive to fill, and then keep the original memory cards as “backups”, but the idea of trying to organise and store hundreds of assorted CF/SD/xD (etc) memory cards has less appeal that storing half a dozen similarly sized/shaped stand alone HDs…I find it easier to transfer/copy files off memory cards, thus freeing up the same cards for re-use.
Being somewhat (:-O) pedantic in nature, I always stored, marked up, and catalogued/indexed, my old “hard copy” 35mm photos/negatives and slides in a sequential film order, by date, so I guess I just carried on in a similar manner when I went digital…. albeit with the benefit that all those “1s and 0’s” take up far less physical space than hundreds of sets of enprints and negative strips, or hundreds of boxes of mounted 35mm slides, and without the time consuming need to hand write date and location on the back of 36 photos or slides, as the camera automatically added a date to each file, and more recently it can even add a location detail too.
I do soemtimes wonder what will happen to my collection of photos when I curl up my toes, I guess the kids will wade through the HD’s keeping the folders of family holidays/events of interest to them, but delete all the “boring old airshow and aircraft” image folders – or more likely they may simply wipe/dump the files on the HDs and reuse the memory space for new stuff of their own – assuming USB connectivity is even still around to allow them to “see” what is on the HDs….
Paul FHave used the crossing in both directions several times now that all work seams to be completed. The southbound flows very well with no hold ups, the north bound is a bit slower with small queues forming possibly because of the very close proximity of junctions.
Yes, having used the crossing many times since it went “barrier-less” just under two years ago there has been a marked improvemen in traffic flow, though we have frequently been travelling southbound and seen northbound queues stretching back beyond the M2/A2 junction (so the law of averages says we will still, eventually, get caught in a longer delay when travelling northbound).
The most alarming thing about the Dart Charge set up is that we can see just how much we have spent in Dartford tolls over the last two years – thank goodness DART account holders only pay £1.67 per crossing, and not the full toll!
The one frustrating thing is that, if local news reports are to be believed, many unpaid tolls owed by foreign registered vehicles still go unpaid, and it seems too much of a coincidence that the percentage value of such “unrecovered” tolls is almost exactly the same as the percentage increase by which the tolls were raised when the barriers were removed.
So, ‘so far so good’ I guess?
I just hope the Highways Agency doesn’t choose to add the proposed “new” Thames crossing at Dartford, but moves it further downstream. I’m not in favour of blighting other parts of Kent/Essex with a new crossing and the associated miles of new connecting roads between M25 and A2/M2/M20 etc, but the current Dartford section of the M25 will not be able to cope with much more traffic, so it seems far more sensible to run any new crossing further east (downstream) so that Channel-crossing traffic heading from/to East Anglia, the Midlands, and all points further North can be routed via the new crossing, thus avoiding adding to the traffic bottleneck at Dartford.
Of course, once UK finally leaves EU, there may be a sudden decline in cross-channel traffic using the south east corner of UK road network, thus negating the need for increased Thames crossing capacity in the area…. :-O.
Paul FThe Northumbrian countryside and beachs are pretty good too!But as I come from thereabouts I am a little biased!!!
WL745 That is an understatement and a half, the beaches and countryside are stunning, and so unspoilt (and I don’t even come form the area!)…but shhh, don’t tell everyone, or they’ll all come and trample all over it!
In Summer 2014 we loved taking long evening walks on the southern end of the immense sandy expanse of Druridge Bay most evenings where we enjoyed epic sunsets and stunning views right up to Coquet Island, but barely saw another soul….. and even in school hols places like Alnmouth, Bamburgh, and Holy Island didn’t feel too crowded. If I were you I’d want to keep that ‘patch’ all to myself.
Sign In
