my forum namesake is a Vietnam Veteran, and an even rarer one as she was subsequently modifed for cartographic survey duties

She sat neglected outside the gate at Avalon for many years until they towed her inside for a new paint job and tyres so she could serve as “gate guardian” for the 2011 Airshow, though i do not know what has become of her since

Was the fibreglass strengthened with copper cable, perchance?

engine was held down by an old crane chain too i think

No, aside from the B-29 (which served in Korea and in other roles until 1960so it qualifies as a “Cold War” aircraft)…which probably has Vulcan-like operating costs (with AVGAS being more expensive than jet fuel).

But to be fair, the B-47s were retired long before anyone was mad enough to ever think about keeping a large complex jet flying.
The B-58 with four J-79s….even the Saudis don’t have enough money for fuel.

In the early 70s there was a plan to get the B-36 at Fort Worth airworthy (the plane is now at the Pima Air Museum).
The expense was huge and the USAF was not happy with the prospect of one in civilian hands. Probably not as much about it being used to drop bombs, but the fact that if it ever went down it would wipe out a few blocks and the inevitable legal liabilities.

Surely the RAAF’s F-111 fleet qualifies?

There has been some rumblings that one may find its way onto the civillian circuit though id be amazed if it eventuated

they are too complex and too high a performance machine to be in private hands

1 when in raf service they were supported by large teams of raf technicians and the factory plus government funding wich in the cold war era was a bottomless pocket !!

not by a small group of idividuals giving cabbies !! ( no matter how skilled you cannot in all seriousness believe a backyard garage can give the same exacting and day to day knoledge standards of a specialist opperating base that used them from new !!

2 it was not without reason our own caa grounded them to stop accidents as they were considdered too hot a machine in private hands and there were concerns about maintainance !!

3 and tragic as it was do we realy need another ramstien to realise they are not suitable aircraft for private hands ( as mentioned it was considdered leathal by regular lightning pilots !! )

fantastic aircraft and no doubt operated to the best of the companys abilitys maybe nursed and maybe looked superb inside and out

but there are so many intricate factory tollerances , stress fatigues , correct metal hardnesses ( for every part !! )

that in all reality you cannot say that all the orriginal knowledge is there for a half cetury old high tech aircraft

i have worked in aerospace engineering specificaly in metal heat treatment

so it could ( not saying it is !! ) but could even be one component slightly off spec

the only way of knowing what has happened without pointing fingers is wait to see what the proffesionals report says when it is finnished !!

your a tit short of an udder sir!

as for your claims to working in Aero Enginineering…..lets just say you shouldnt give that up to become a spell checker.

to call an operation like TC a “backyard garage” operation smacks of ignorance, stupidity, arrogance and a total lack of knowledge in what is involved in maintaining an aircraft.

By your own reasoning, a commercial jetliner is “far too high performance” a machine to be operated in private hands!!

Personally, i think that when you can boast the first hand expierience of maintaining an aircraft such as the Lightning for a decade with an almost flawless safety record you should refrain from embarrassing yourself further.

Unusual site to make remarks about a Yorkshire port? I think this is a mockup(cockup ?) of a proposed triplane/biplane for a French multiwing fighter,bomber and seaplane glider.:D

a quinplane?

Definitely Halifaxes, wing profile is wrong for a Lanc