Tom,
I know your busy with reinactments, but I tried to email you regarding another matter and sent you a PM here requesting you email me to re-establish contact regarding another matter.
regards
Mark Pilkington
Nils,
It would seem the part number for this plate is 03-808, while the 285 confirms it as a Wellington, as per the parts number list in the link.
The serial number 61424, and the particular part relating to 03-808 might be best enquired with the Brooklands Museum who have an intact Wellington mark 1A which they restored after recovery from Loch Ness, I suspect they should be able to decifer the name plate you have from their reference material?
http://www.brooklandsmuseum.com/aviation_exhibits.cfm
regards
Mark Pilkington
Nils,
I think this is what you are looking for:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=80812&highlight=part+number+list
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Firstly two questions.
First one) when was the last time you went to see the wrecksite
Second) I agree with you to a point on recovery but I would sooner see her partially reassembled into something that looks like a Lancaster. I know the tail section would look very impressive with the tailplanes and fins refitted and possibly a rear turrett fitted as well leaving the original paint “as is”
Peter / Richard
I would be dis-appointed to see “re-assembly” in any form of the wreck of Elsie, it is no longer a Lancaster, it is a wreck, and I dont say that as a derrogatory comment, I mean that its worth is now as the wreck of that event in 1944. (I realise it was much more intact than it is now)
I would be pleased to see it laid out under cover approximating its current disposition, but assume you would need a fairly large building to re-create the current crash site layout.
Once you start restoring parts such as the tail, fitting turrets not from the wreck, you have destroyed its unique originality, and in my mind the justification for its recovery. (The outcome would look far stranger than the restored turret sitting on the nose of the Hendon Halifax).
Ideally the wreck should be preserved/conserved, not restored in any way, ideally it should have that happen “in the battlefield” but if that cant / wont happen then relocation to the UK would seem suitable given the historical links there.
regards
Mark Pilkington
.
Dubai, your oil profits at work,
or is that
Dubai, the ultimate in “Carbon Trading”?
smiles
Mark Pilkington
Peter,
my blocked photos were IMG links to two photos on Troy Kirby’s website
(http://www.lancaster-kb882.freeservers.com/photo2.html)
captioned as FM221 & FM216 respectively:
http://lancaster-kb882.freeservers.com/images/crash_no21.jpg
&
http://lancaster-kb882.freeservers.com/images/crash_site_3.jpg
(The images are apparantly automatically blocked by the server hosting Troy’s website)
Those photo’s are reproduced and credited in the first two images in your post above.
The next 3 photos in your post depicting recent photos of FM216 appear to show the same basic remains as FM221 but clearly a different wreck with the evidence of the broken back of FM221 implied by the location of the tail unit.
Again little if any remains of the main fuselage and it appears the cockpit has been burnt away leaving the remanents of the canopy sitting in front of the main spar?
Similarly the remanents of the covered wagon section of the fuselage over the centre-section, and the deterioration of the centre-section itself suggests a fire was lit to consume the remains, that didnt succeed in destroying the wing outer panels and tail, but causing more rapid corrosion and loss of the heat stressed material over successive years?
Again, a recoverable tail section and wing outers but only of use to someone with a reasonable section of fuselage and a huge amout of time and money.
The earlier photo of FM221 by Anthony Jarvis appears to show the same type of deterioration to the centre-section and I suspect its fuselage and centre-section were similarly disposed of. I am sure I have seen photos of (FM221?) a badly battered section of cockpit nose with rudder pedals still in place, so I assume both wrecks are still “all there” just no longer intact, rather than being evidence of scrapping or souvenir hunters.
thanks for the photos Peter.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
.
According to Troy Kirby’s excellent website on KB882 there were/are two Lanc. wrecks at Resolute, FM221 and FM216 which crashed within a month of each other in 1950.
http://www.lancaster-kb882.freeservers.com/photo2.html
FM221
FM216
Both photos appear to show parts recovery underway by the RCAF at the time, and the remains surviving today in the photo in the original post seems to be FM221 only because its tail in sitting in its approx correct position where as FM216 apparantly suffered a broken fuselage in the crash with its tailplane resting at angle to main fuselage.
Do any recent photos exist of the wreck of FM216 to confirm its current state?
Clearly FM221 has deteriorated beyond environmental affects from its original crash due to manmade intervention.
Is it possible both airframes were burnt by the departing RCAF parts recovery team, or by a subsequent visit to ensure the wreck wasnt mistaken for a recently downed aircraft – this has been the justification for the destruction of many other wrecks.
If both are in this poor condition they seem well beyond rebuilding in their own right, and most other Lancaster restorations already have the main components that seem to be surviving in the picture, making recovery unlikely or un-neccessary?
The only possible use for the relatively intact wing outer panels, tail planes etc (other than individual display as parts) could be with the former KB994/KB976 “fuselage” recovered from the UK a few years ago, if that project was ever able to develop from its intended restored fuselage display outcome, to a complete airframe, however I dont think that is likely.
That project is without a rear fuselage and centre-section, which while examples survive elsewhere , both would need to be also acquired to make any recovery and use of the tailplanes and wing outer panels viable.
The York is similarly “well short” of a complete airframe, despite a relatively intact wing tip to tip, the rear fuselage is seperated and damaged and the substantial forward fuselage and cockpit appear totally destroyed.
The large box fuselage would be a huge and difficult project to recreate accurately, and while the wing outer panels, fins and rudders may also be of use for a Lancaster project the wing centre-section is wider due to the York fuselage width and therefore only good for re-use in a York project.
Being only 2 survivors world wide, the parts are unlikely to be needed for re-use other than if someone can take on the recovery and future re-build of this aircraft itself. I cannot comment on the importance of the York as a type to Canada’s Aviation Heritage to know the level of interest in that happening?
It may be possible to recreate the forward fuselage to be externally complete, with non-aviation internal crossbracing and materials, but to build that large box section to its original design to hold its own weight and remain rigid and straight would require a large jig, and siginificant aluminium in terms of fuselage frames and stringers, all in all a much “larger” project than the cockpit mockup on the YAM Halifax FSM in the UK.
regards
Mark Pilkington
.
End of the last day countdown and it seems the pledges exceeded 950k UK Pounds as was expected, the Vulcan flys for a while longer (but not yet confirmed for the whole of 2009)?
Congratulations to the entire team, for a surprising result.
However it seems no “Major” corporate sponsor has stepped forward publicly, (despite the publicity, media and public interest that would reward that with far more recognition etc than has been previously available) suggesting that the original corporate sponsorship reliance or expectations will not eventuate, leaving the only ongoing funding resources members monthly subscriptions and public fundraising.
Apparantly the pledges only attracted 10,000 supporters, well below the supposed 30,000 members and friends, putting the average contribution at 100 pounds per head, suggesting that will not be repeatable too often.
The Vulcan is an expensive aircraft to run, if the supporter base cannot be expanded and relied upon to provide sufficient monthly subscriptions the project will be back in this same situation and I suspect will not be as successful the next time round.
This project in my mind was/is the most ambitious aviation heritage project in the world due to the scale of its economics, it is also becoming high profile around the world.
Despite the view it was soaking up HLF funds that might have been better spent elsewhere, it is promoting aviation heritage on a grand scale, and with wide media interest.
However I aso believe its eventual failure with that wide media focus could do significant damage to aviation heritage projects and fundraising world wide in regards to corporate and government support.
I hope the Management come clean with open details of the use of the current fundraising and outlook, improve their performance in attracting and communicating with supporters etc in the future, and develop and invoke a viable business plan.
below is the current VTST announcement over the pledges.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Vulcan now truly “The People’s Aircraft”
Thousands of pledges provide a future for the Vulcan
One month ago, the Vulcan to the Sky Trust (VTST) had to announce that the prospects of seeing Vulcan XH558, the world’s only flying Vulcan, ever flying again were looking very poor as the result of the lack of cash, and that notices had had to be given to its employees that their jobs would end on Friday 6th March
With the launch of a Pledge Campaign to raise £1million, VTST based its future on the public’s affection for the Vulcan and their desire to see it fly.
As the deadline of the end of today approaches, the Pledge Campaign has this morning (11.00am) passed £956,835, pledged by over 9,821 supporters, and so has excellent prospects of passing its goal of £1million imminently.
This is the third time in seven years that the future of the Vulcan in flight has been saved by the support of thousands of members of the public, making XH558 “The People’s Aircraft”. Never has one historic aircraft owed so much to so many!
Sponsors provide breathing space
On their own, pledges can’t solve the Trust’s immediate cash problem, because they each need now to be converted into cash donations. The Trust is therefore very grateful to its sponsors, Aerobytes Ltd and Judd Power, who have today committed sufficient cash to keep the Trust going for another month, allowing time for the pledges to be redeemed.
As the result, VTST is delighted to announce that it is able to continue its activities on a more secure financial footing, and that the prospects of seeing the Vulcan fly in 2009 are now good.
Supporters led the way forward
For the past month, supporters of the Vulcan have been tireless in their fundraising activities, ranging from the cross-country Vulcan Scramble, to “Pledgathon” events across the UK. VTST is enormously grateful to all the members of the Vulcan to the Sky Club for their help.
Inspiring the Young
There are well over 10 million young people who have never seen the Vulcan in flight. Following the success of the Pledge Campaign, these youngsters now have an opportunity to experience this inspirational “once seen, never forgotten” sight.
Because we cannot assume that all the pledges will be honoured, we are asking the the public to continue to pledge financial support, either through our website http://www.vulcantothesky.org or by phone to our office on 0116 247 8145. We have demonstrated that even the smallest pledge helps, because it is people in their thousands who make the difference.
Robert Pleming
6th March 2009
.
The clock has stopped with a pledge tally of £938,077.
I remain surprised and impressed at the level of pledges received, and assuming the bulk of those are real offers and not phantom bids, the project appears to gets a reprieve and flys on for a little longer.
But its now reported above that the annual costs to run are 1.8M UKP per annum (@$4M AUD or @$3M USD), those are mind boggling in themselves and still twice as much as was just raised.
I previously thought the costs were about 600k UKP per annum or @$1.2M AUD / @$800k USD) which seemed enormous on their own, let alone this higher number???
It does raise the question of how much the recent pledge actually “buy’s” the donors? and the media and general public will quickly respond if TVOC now maintain the previous habit of regularly calling for more funds “or the Vulcan gets it”.
There have been suggestions a management change and improved marketing is required, however with such high operating costs I dont think it is viable even in a booming economy.
The whole proposition of the project still appears questionable, and raises the question of how it got past the HLF in the first place?
Regards
Mark Pilkington
A wonderful development, I wish it all the success.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
ATR – on their site it says they need £1.8 million to operate per year. Therefore depending on the amount of debt required to clear it remains to be seen how much more they need this year.
?? I thought it the operating costs were more like 60k pounds a month or 600k per annum, 1.8M per annum, is that to clear debt, or really always intended/expected to be the annual operating cost?
Regards
Mark Pilkington
.
Three hours into the “final day”, and effectively another @100k raised (90k in 23 hours) thats now 3 days of @100k on the roll, suggesting a result in the order of 950k+ subject to a final day surge!
I have to say I was a pessimistic doubter of the ability of the team to pull this off, but the proof appears to be there. (yes I know pledges dont directly convert to donations), again good luck to them and well done.
XH558 Will Be Grounded
In
00 Days, 21:24:30 Pledged £833,517
http://www.vulcantothesky.org/
Vulcan ’09 Pledge Campaign
<– TIME IS RUNNING OUTVulcan XH558 will be grounded forever, unless further funding of £1million is identified by early March. This funding will allow the project to pay its monthly expenses, clear debt and provide a stable financial footing for the future.
To Make A Pledge Click Here
http://www.vulcantothesky.org/pledge1.asp
Looks like the Vulcan will fly through 2009 and subject to a revised business plan and membership subscriptions might have a possibility of ongoing flight? (who would have thought that possible without an intervention by HLF or sole benefactor?)
Fingers crossed for them
regards
Mark Pilkington
.
4 hours into the second last day, and another 100k pledged since the same time yesterday!, thats two days running of 100k pledges!!
XH558 Will Be Grounded
In
01 Days, 20:15:19 Pledged £742,650
With just under 2 days to go a total in the order of 950k is well within target if the 100k average is maintained.
Quite impressive given the economic outlook? and recession in place!
Again well done to those doing the hard work.
http://www.vulcantothesky.org/
Vulcan ’09 Pledge Campaign
<– TIME IS RUNNING OUTVulcan XH558 will be grounded forever, unless further funding of £1million is identified by early March. This funding will allow the project to pay its monthly expenses, clear debt and provide a stable financial footing for the future.
To Make A Pledge Click Here
http://www.vulcantothesky.org/pledge1.asp
Fingers crossed for them
regards
Mark Pilkington
.
Surely the Handley Page HP88 is deserving of its own “post your Handley Page HP88 Pictures here” thread? smiles
Avro 707A WD280 is at the RAAF Museum Point Cook, photo showing it being recovered from Geoff Mallett’s back yard where it had been privately preserved after research testing by the RAAF.

regards
Mark Pilkington
.
3 hours into the third last day (my previous post was quoting a “day” premature)
XH558 Will Be Grounded
In
02 Days, 20:42:06 Pledged £643,457
@100k pledged in @28 hours, quite impressive, with just under 3 days to go, an average of @100k per day would see the 1M largely reached??
fingers crossed for the project team and volunteers, again well done.
regards
Mark Pilkington