Thanks Scott. Just to push my point a little further, wouldn’t it be nice to see scenes like this again at East Fortune. 🙂
The earlier mentions about how it would be nice to see the Beaufighter at East Fortune restored reminded me I had this pic tucked away. Hopefully, this is a sight we’ll see at East Fortune in the not too distant future.
It’s really just an excuse for a gratuitous Beaufighter picture, but when did anyone need an excuse for that! :rolleyes:
Some of the less charitable people around could even argue that the sums spent and publicity gained from the Concorde was an ideal distraction from
the debacle of the Scottish parliament!
I would be interested to know the amount spent so far as I guess it must be information in the public domain. The inspection of airfields in Scotland by BA was obviously to view the possibility of a flying Concorde arriving in Scotland. As pointed out that is now history. I will be interested when the final figure for all the Concorde move and rehousing is available. I guess it must rank as the most money spent on the preservation of a single airframe in the U.K.
I’d need to check, but IIRC, the National Museums were given £2 million. This, however, was not for the single airframe but for the development of the whole Museum of Flight. As I say, I can’t guarantee this is 100% accurate, but the supplement to the Annual Report should be out soon I think which would provide detailed figures.
What is more important is the cost of transporting her by road, compared to the huge amount that would be required to get her back in the air – for one trip. Millions have been spent, but not only on transport, but also on work at the museum itself. The Museum of Flight has suffered from under-investment by NMs for decades and it took Concorde to unlock Scottish Executive funding to achieve it. I know NMS looked into transporting G-BOAA by air but it simply wasn’t feasible. At the end of the day, what’s done is done. The aircraft couldn’t fly to the MoF, but it has been transported and there seems little point argunig whether it could or couldn’t. It’s not going to change the fact that she went by road and sea and is at East Fortune now.
Whatever
Clearly you don’t believe me. Fair enough. I don’t know who it was you spoke to, and I’m not seeking names because that wouldn’t be fair on those particular guys. However, I can guarantee that APSS is still on site and doing some work on Wednesdays (and other days). Not as much as they would like, but they are still there, and you can contact the APSS if you don’t believe me. You may have spoken to some disenchanted members, but they clearly were not giving you correct information. If you contact the committee, you will get more accurate information. I visit the Museum of Flight as often as I can, and I’m in regular contact with the secretary of the APSS, as well as attending the AGM, so whether you believe me or not, I do know a little about what I’ve posted here.
Having spoken at length with a BA engineer it’s very evident that the safe operation the type in BA hands didn’t pose a problem.
I’m not talking about the type in general. G-BOAA could never have flown because it was stripped for spares for the rest of the fleet. I’m not sure what avionics were left in her, but I know the rest of the airframe was stripped out, to the entent that NMS have had to go to the original carpet manufacturers to commission new carpets for her. Whilst it was entirely possible for Concorde to fly after the Paris crash, and indeed several did as we all know, G-BOAA was never going to be one of them, unless millions of pounds had been spent on her, which wasn’t an option for NMS.
Hi
I can’t have been in the same place then – it is best just to differ on this and move on and I had lunch with the guys off site as I was invited several months ago. I don’t need to have an issue over this it is a difference of opinion that’s all
Regards
John P
Well, no, I wouldn’t class it as a difference of opinion, but a difference of fact. It is a FACT that APSS are still on site. It’s as simple as that.
Ok so G-BOAA did not get the mods that other Concord’s got but it was certainly kept in an airworthy condition so would it have been possible to apply for a one off ferry flight permit ?
Actually, no. By not having the mods the aircraft did not have an airworthy certificate and could never fly again.
I’m not denying there is a problem, and there are certainly airframes that the volunteers have not been allowed to work on, such as the Vulcan and the Beaufighter. However, that is entirely different to your statement that they had been told not to turn up for work (even though they are unpaid volunteers). The fact you spoke to them over lunch shows that they are still on site! My point is that your comment was incorrect and does nothing to help resolve the situation. Anyone on this forum, who hasn’t been to East Fortune in recent months, would think the APSS weren’t even allowed on site anymore, which is certainly not true. There are still a number of ongoing projects, even if NMS isn’t utilising APSS’s skills as fully as it should.
especially the restoration chaps who have been asked not to come to work for a few years !!!!
I don’t mean to be rude, but this is just not true. I’m a member of the Aviation Preservation Society of Scotland and know several of their members, including committee members, well even though I’m not able to get involved in the restoration work. This is a lot of discontent about the way the collections have been treated, but I think the situation is starting to improve. However, they have not been asked not to turn up on site and are still working on several projects including the 1 and a half Strutter flying replica.
Incorrect statements do no-one any good.
Would it not have been easiyer to fly the Concord to East Fortune if nothing else it would save on the costs of putting the thing back together.
I can’t believe we’re going down this path again. This point has already been raised in the past. There simply was no alternative to transporting G-BOAA because it could not fly. It did not receive the modifications after the Paris crash (such as Kevlar lining to the fuel tanks) and therefore was not airworthy. G-BOAA could not have been flown to East Fortune or anywhere else. End of story. Alternative transportation therefore had to be found and, sadly, this meant cutting the wings off.
The attchment is from a ’40’s local newspaper and is showing its age.
Not quite showing it enough. :rolleyes:
Good point. I missed that. 😮
More on the BAT bomb here: http://biomicro.sdstate.edu/pederses/asmbat.html
Despite the failure of Project X-ray, a lesser-known weapon system named BAT did in fact exceed expectations and was active in the arsenal of the United States Navy from 1945 through 1953 (Buford and Boyd, 1953; Huff, 1950; Van Vleet et al., 1981). Indeed, the BAT air-to-surface missile (ASM-N-2: Special Weapons Ordinance Device–SWOD Mk 9) was the first fully automatic guided-missile to be used operationally by any of the combatants during WWII (April 23, 1945). During this time, there were many wire-, radio-, and television-guided bombs, either glider-type or self-propelled, that were used by the Germans and Americans during the war (e.g., Henschel Hs-293, GB-4), however, the BAT was the very first, fully-automatic, weapon system, the archetype of what we now term “fire and forget” weaponry. Once launched, the BAT went solo, guided to its target by an early S-band radar unit (see below), developed by the Bell Telephone Laboratories.
Alastair,
From the same site as mentioned above, confirmation of the Kennedy connection with the B17s:
Radio Controlled Bomber Drone. Project Aphrodite. The idea was to pack an aged bomber with 10 tons of explosives and fly it into the impregnable submarine pens on the French coast. A pilot was required to get the bomber airborne and trimmed so that a controlling plane could fly it to the target. The first plane exploded over England before the pilot had bailed out. The pilot was Navy Lt Joseph Kennedy, eldest son of that family, who was being groomed for the presidency, a post later held by the second son, John F. Kennedy.