dark light

Sky High

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 7,143 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1132410
    Sky High
    Participant

    ZRH61 – sounds like the Vulcan boys could do with you blagging, as from TOMORROW!!:D

    in reply to: Cropped Aerial Photos Luftwaffe Airfields #1131824
    Sky High
    Participant

    No problems here. Very interesting link – thanks.:)

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1131685
    Sky High
    Participant

    The more I read on this thread the more dispirited I become. The arguments will rage on meanwhile a project, which at best was based on mountains of optimism and at worst ill-considered and ineptly planned, may die.

    As for the Lottery money being wasted, that’s a red herring. It hasn’t been wasted because without it the aircract would not have flown at all. And I can think of many cases where Lottery money has been ill-spent or mis-spent. People buy tickets for their hoped for enrichment and I doubt that 1 in a million gives a single thought as to what or who their pounds might be benifitting.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1131394
    Sky High
    Participant

    Which rather suggests that the information will not be willingly made available. Sorry to have gone over old ground. The speculation will no doubt continue.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1131410
    Sky High
    Participant

    That would certainly call their bluff, if indeed they are being intentionally chary at providing the information. Perhaps someone from here should challenge them to do so.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1131273
    Sky High
    Participant

    J Boyle

    So far as I am aware the award of a Lottery grant is not predicated on whether or not there is a perceived “value for money”. It is impossible to quantify this loose phrase in any case.

    And since the workings of the Commission are a mystery to most of us whether or not they would compare one award for aircraft preservation and its outcome with another submission we will never know.

    What is abundantly clear from this thread is the arguments will rage on and on and on. And soon we will all know whether or not the Vulcan will ever fly again.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1130128
    Sky High
    Participant

    Kev

    Don’t some projects have to move forward on hope and expectation, based on a plan, as much as anything else? Surely no one would be fool enough to guarantee a successful long term outcome when pitching for HLF cash. Particularly when other funding was also needed.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1130137
    Sky High
    Participant

    I saw those figures too. I too hope so, but I doubt it because I sense there are some people who have got it in for the whole enterprise and won’t be satisfied until it dies.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1129964
    Sky High
    Participant

    Unfortunately, there’s a common misconception that anyone who either isn’t enamoured by the Vulcan or has raised concerns regarding the project management wants the project to fail and see the aircraft grounded. We’re all entitled to our opinions, but it is quite sad to see anyone who doesn’t fall into the “pro-558” camp be branded a ‘hater’.

    Of course, it couldn’t simply be that some people don’t “love” the Vulcan and some of us won’t be gutted if it doesn’t fly this year. Many other aircraft have come and gone, it’s the nature of the business. It’ll be a shame, yes, but despite the thoughts of some, I personally think there is a lot more to the British airshow scene than XH558.

    My reading of pages of posts is that there are some who fall into that category, as inferred from what they write. If I am wrong, then so be it. I have branded no one a “hater” as you put it and I don’t think there are two camps. There are many with a foot on both sides.
    As for your last sentence that is indisputable, even for Vulcan lovers, I’m sure.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1129966
    Sky High
    Participant

    Kev, I’m sorry, but I didn’t mention your name or indeed anyone elses. There are some who are very critical but despite that want it to succeed.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1130002
    Sky High
    Participant

    Having read the previous thread two things stand out.

    Firstly the deep passion and anger engendered over the restoration of an, arguably iconic, aircraft. And secondly the strength of the doubting Thomases in wanting the project to fail then.

    And here we see it again – financial crisis approaches and the same, dare I suggest, pleasure of the “I told-you-so” variety expressed by some posters on this thread.

    Why are some of you so angry? It can’t just be, as you would see it, money wasted, because serious money is being wasted on our behalf, daily. It must be something about the Vulcan………

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1130006
    Sky High
    Participant

    Thanks for adding that. I also think the HLF funding aspect to be a red herring and said so in an earlier post.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1129764
    Sky High
    Participant

    OK – you’ve all made your points, some with with great vehemence and I accept that no one wants it to fail and that many of you have been angry by the way it was handled from day 1.

    I hope I am not being anything other than realistic in that from all I have read here and elsewhere we are going to be very lucky to see the great bird fly this year.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1129615
    Sky High
    Participant

    Someone made the same point the other day. We would like to think that each request for help is treated on its own merits and would not be tarnished by the Vulcan experience.

    Having said that we must not lose sight of the fact that the Vulcan was restored and did fly for two air display seasons. Hardly a failure, but perhaps only a qualified success. It would be a very different matter if it had never flown, despite the money donated.

    in reply to: What is this? #1129095
    Sky High
    Participant

    WELL?

    Don’t they say please down your way?

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 7,143 total)