It seems the focus for Tighars fundraising and expeditions is now the “White Bird” – I wonder if the departing Board Members did not support that renewed project given the absolute lack of success of the previous 19 expeditions

Interesting to see Mr Glickman has left the board, I suspect once Tom King was kicked off the TIGHAR Board in 2018, any shreds of reason and archaeological science gave way to Gillespie spindoctoring.

we can only hope the death throes become rigormortis in the near future.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 

From a post on this forum in Sept 2018
“This is from TIGHAR Board Chairman Lee Paynter.

Statement from the TIGHAR Board of Directors

At a Special Meeting of the TIGHAR Board of Directors, held on Friday August 31, 2018, Tom King was removed as a director.  Six of eight directors attending, of nine total directors (since Tom chose not to participate) voted for his removal.  Although I personally requested he remain as an active and participating member, Tom withdrew from TIGHAR membership on September 1.  

Tom King had conflicts of interest with respect to his service on the TIGHAR board. In and of itself, conflict of interest is not necessarily disqualifying; but the primary responsibility of a director of any organization is, by law, to further the goals and welfare of the organization. Tom King had shown himself to be unable to subordinate his interests to those of the organization he was pledged to serve.  

Whether it is the confusion his independent Amelia Earhart Archaeology blog and his Earhart mystery-related works of fiction cause; his willingness to cut private deals with media outlets such as National Geographic and the Archaeology Channel; or his refusal to abide by TIGHAR’s artifact collection and accession protocols, Tom used his relationship with TIGHAR primarily to serve his own personal and professional agenda.  These and other issues have been the subject of numerous communications to Tom by board members, only to be met with sarcasm and insults.   His participation on the TIGHAR board had become so disruptive as to prevent the board from being able to function at all.  

Many months ago, with the concurrence of a majority of the board, I asked Tom to resign from the board, but not from TIGHAR, for the good of the organization.  He initially agreed, if the board would make clear certain policies with respect to access and care of artifacts and research, and the administration of the Antiquities Management Agreement with Kiribati.  I wrote such a set of statements and resolutions.  They were unacceptable to Tom.  Another board member wrote additional versions.  They were also unacceptable to Tom.  Tom then submitted his own set, which were unacceptable to a majority of board members as being overly and unnecessarily restrictive.  At that point we moved forward with the process of removing Tom as a director, for the original reason of conflicts of interest. 

Lee Paynter, Chairman
TIGHAR Board of Directors “

« Last Edit: August 22, 2022, 11:52:45 AM by Matt Revington »

I recently purchased this 1926 Napier Lion Piston fixed to a base with a placard referring it to being “875 HP Napier Lion Schneider Trophy 1927” and hence it is assumed to be from a geared mk VIIB 875 bhp (652 kW) (racing) as fitted to the Supermarine S5 which won the 1927 Schneider Trophy air race, flown by Flt Lt S.N. Webster

The piston is a 5.5″ bore, stamped with an assumed manufacture date of 19.10.26.

In regards to possible “foreign registered aircraft” I can confirm:

its NOT G-AUKD as that registration was allocated and flown on Avro Avian IV c/n 201

its NOT G-AUKO as that registration was not issued prior to the introduction of the VH- allocations and hence the DH60G c/n 1069 that might have otherwise been G-AUKO was instead delivered and flown as VH-UKO, so unless it was tested in the UK with that G-A markings, the registration itself was not formally issued.

Is it just the CAA thats needs to approve a ferry flight or the CAAand the airframe and engine type holders as well?

from wiki for what its worth?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 

On 15 May 2015 it was announced that 2015 would be XH558’s last flying season, due to the fact the three companies assisting the project with technical expertise (BAE Systems, Marshall Aerospace and Defence Group and Rolls-Royce) were unwilling to support the aircraft beyond that, meaning it would no longer have the necessary CAA approval to fly. According to the Trust, the companies arrived at the decision for two reasons – they were now entering uncertain territory regarding predicting future safety risks to continued flight due to the fact XH558 had already performed ten percent more flying hours than any other Vulcan, and secondly, the increasing difficulty in obtaining the necessary expertise, particularly with regard to the engines.[3][25]

Various options to continue flights beyond 2015 were considered and ultimately rejected for engineering, cost, practicality or other reasons outside of the Trust’s control – limiting the hours flown in 2015, building new Olympus engines and sourcing parts from other Vulcans, training new staff, using other technical authorities, and even relocating XH558 to another country.[26] As a result, following completion of the 2015 Farewell to Flight display season, XH558’s final ever flight occurred on 28 October 2015, a small display at its Doncaster Sheffield base.[1]

Future plansEdit

With XH558 now permanently grounded, the Trust intends to remain at Doncaster Sheffield Airport, and make the Vulcan the focus of a new educational and heritage facility. This is in part due to the Trust’s ongoing commitment to keep XH558 in good condition and use it for educational purposes, which they committed to do for 80 years as a condition of the 2005 Lottery funding. The first stage being to establish the Vulcan Aviation Academy & Heritage Centre. This will feature an academy building for 14–18 year olds, which will focus on “six areas of aviation skills: piloting, air traffic controls, airport ground operations, aircraft operations, cabin crew and aviation engineering”. XH558 will be housed in an adjacent heritage centre, where it will be maintained so as to be able to perform regular fast taxi runs, the frequency of which would be funding dependent. With less engineering required to support the Vulcan as a taxiable exhibit, the Trust’s associated engineering company was examining the possibility of setting up as an independent, CAA-approved, heritage aviation servicing operation. As a result of the new focus post-flight operations, the Trust’s additional base at Hinckley was also to close

This one Vulcan has consumed tens of millions of pounds that could have otherwise preserved and protected its brethren and other iconic british types (even Beverley’s facing an extinction event) and yet instead VTST still treat it as something “special”.

On the ground, it is just another grounded / static Vulcan, British Aviation Museums are full of them!.

Imagine instead if they had used all that money to secure Bruntingthorpe Runway and a hangar / museum site for the Vulcan, Victor and other aircraft to be displayed and then do ground/runway runs, there was the opportunity for a true “cold war” display that would keep the aircraft active and preserved.. Instead it flew so more british citizens could see it in the air, except from 2016 new generations are coming who didn’t see it and will never see it, no different from when the type was grounded in the first place!

There are 14 others in the UK in museums, 1 in Canada and 3 in the USA, this particular one has consumed Millions of pounds for a brief return to the air that instead could have funded roofs over all of its brethren and saved other unique types like the Blackburn Beverley from an extinction event.