VTTSCMMy understanding is that there will be a high tech “battle bus” travelling to airshows and when not flying to schools and other educational establishments.
Gotta say, I’d love that job.
me too!!!!1
VTTSCMI disagree. As I said a few posts back, I’ve been firmly in the “pessimistic” camp on the Vulcan, but since you came onto the forum, I’ve learned a lot more, entirely through your efforts at putting information across. I wouldn’t say I’ve been swayed, but my views are far less entrenched than they were two days ago.
It’s Gratifying that I have at least made some of you re-think and re-evaluate your opinions of VTTS(TVOC)’s project…. This is probably my swansong…. I think I have done all I can to try and convert some of you…
I will leave with a couple of thoughts…. one of the forum members sent me a private message, below… also my reply…. it will give you some idea of the basis of my passion for this aircraft….
Quote:
DON’T BITE – they think it’s weakness!
Bite?? I’d like to chew a few b***s off….. This bird means a lot to me, she has cost me 12yrs of my life, working in snow, ice, downpours, burning sun, but alternativly she has given me the greatest feeling of pride and elation possible, when she went down that runway head held high and the greatest thrill of my life when I went with her… and I knew, she did it because my mates and I maintained her so well that she could still do it.. now I want someone else (VTTS) to do what we couldn’t and carry on where we left off, finish the job……….get her back up where she belongs..
2] if they hadn’t have tried, we would have missed a goldern opportunity of showing the kids of tomorrow what we did in their past…..
BAH volunteer
VTTSCMI admit I am no financial expert but I am aware of the costs involved in keeping a warbird such as Sally B flying.and I would imaging the cost are considerably high with a post war bomber
Also is there the infrastructure to support the aircraft and at what cost
Hi Sparky
What do you mean by infrastructure?? isn’t Marshalls, BAe Systems, 120plus top aviation suppliers enough, plus a v.large hanger? Apart from one or two at cost or nil-cost
regards
VTTSCMAnd the blame for that lack of information on ‘realities’ can only be laid at one door.
Moggy
Is it surprising they say very little?? when there is always a “knocker” around to distort what has been said??
What ever they say will be wrong for somebody(god knows I’ve tried)… so why get into a slanging match…..I think their outlook must be ….let’s be judged on our results(18 months time hopefully)… why not wait and if they fail you can always say I told you so…. conversly you can applologise if they don’t…. but I bet you wont… will you
VTTSCMI’m not confident that anybody is.
Moggy
Like I said before if you have ligitimate reason to ask the question, ring Wimbourne…I’m sure they would be only too pleased to tell you what you wish to know.. regards..
VTTSCMScary. 😮
Moggy
Why scary??? anyone can make a mistake especially if you are not that close in to the centre of things, you believe what you are told until proved wrong.. I am not privy to the full finantial facts…
VTTSCMCloud cookoo land.
Trust me, the government does not fund anybody’s advertising.
The best that can be said is that if the company is profitable, the reduction in the bottom line figure will be reflected by a reduction in corporation tax paid. At best, 40% of the amount spent.
This lack of basic commercial awareness has me very worried.
Moggy
I stand corrected, not being an accountant I must have missunderstood
VTTSCMI think if my questions could be answered in a business-like manner, it should be possible to turn around the opinions of the doubters. The problem is, there has been no response to this. Which just makes it harder to believe.
I want to believe it will work. But I am sensible. I need to see a viable plan. Dreams are great, but financiers need more than dreams to lend money.
There must have been a structured plan in order to have convinced the Lottery Heritage Fund that it was viable.
VTTSCM: Can you help here?
Hi Janie
I will not try to explain further than to say that as Paulos is obviously very much closer to the project than I, his answer (reprinted below) therefore comes straight from the top…
The important thing to remember is that though there in no apparrent revenue stream (unfortunate phrase)….. advertising/sponsorship revenue could and hopefully will keep her flying for years…. if not she will be the best preserved fast taxying vulcan in existance, based at Duxford..her future is secure!!!!
20 Jan. 2005 : Wed 09 Mar. 2005 @ 20.30
——————————————————————————–
To assuage any doubts and assist understanding of the complex financial arrangements of the project the following hopefully helps:
VTST is a charitable company limited by guarantee. It is also a Registered Charity and as such is accountable to the Charities Commission. All monies are accounted for and Tenon Ltd have recently been appointed auditors for the Trust. Accounts will be available and posted on the website after audit when they have been filed with Companies House.
VTST has bought XH558 as required by the Heritage Lottery Fund
VTST has a distinguished list of Trustees and it currently has a very small team who have worked extremely hard to ensure that the goodwill, support and expectation of some 18,000 supporters and 2,000 club members are met.
Monies are banked with HSBC. The Campaign Office is run by Felicity Irwin who is a Trustee and therefore accountable to her fellow Trustees, Companies House and the Charity Commission.
The money has not been invested, as such, other than at higher rate deposit, as it has been uncertain when it would be needed for the purchase of the aircraft and the hangar rental, due to delays not of the making of VTST. It must, however, be understood that the £2,734,000 from the Heritage Lottery Fund is not passed to VTST but paid against invoice.
There is a business plan as this was a requirement of the applications to the Heritage Lottery Fund and includes complicated financial budgeting. The project is unique in that there is no revenue stream and it is, therefore, a necessity that funds continue to be raised from donors and sponsors throughout restoration and XH558’s display life.
Were the project to be abandoned, which we anticipate is very unlikely, the decision with regard to monies would be entirely at the discretion of the Trustees.
All information with regard to the project is available on request by email [email]vulcantothesky@aol.com[/email] or freephone 0800 083 2022
Robert Pleming – Project Director Felicity Irwin – Campaign Director and Trustee
VTTSCM….from where, exactly? That’s what VTTS have yet to make clear, and this rather muddled and non-committal statement does nothing to alleviate these concerns.
Exactly how much do they estimate the running costs to be? What contingency have they allowed for in their calculations? How many hours per year have they allowed for crew training and transit flights?
Hi Mike
As I said before….
QUOTE…
When the bird is flying, Industrial sponsors can call it an advertising asset and claim any advertising expenditure back from the govenment. There is I believe, a lot of interest in using the aircraft for advertising, filmwork etc.. airshow attendances will not be her only income, but she will not be priced out of the market..
There are over 120 companies now signed up the project and supporting it with “”in kind” sponsorship, Including Marshall’s
Crew training… I have been told that when she first flys, she will treated a a prototype, for she will be a different aircraft from the one that landed in 1993. David Thomas and a CAA test pilot will develop her new flight envelope and then retrain the project’s ex-V force pilots.
The last part the £4million? is purely for the restoration….. as I said above there is a lot of advertising interest out there, waiting for wheels-off….. support will come from industrial sponsorship..
Mike
You obviously haven’t read my previous posts (copied above) also as I have said elsewhere ,the hours per year will be approx 40-60… including weekly currency flights (VDF currency flights were between 15 & 35mins.. one per month, unless air testing). There is also interest from both the aviation and oil industies in providing more “in kind ” help for the operational stages.
The question of what if….
If (and I say if) the money runs out then she will retire to Duxford prematurly, which would not worry the HLF particularly, because their heritage asset would be in a registered museum and she would be in exceptional condition.
PR on the project has been bad,I will agree, but if you have a legitimate reason) to question anything about the project, I suggest you ring them up at Wimbourne on 0800 0832022(Do you have a legitimate reason to ask the questions you are, have you contributed a considerable amount of cash to the project? Club members have raised in excess of £82,000, what have you done????) except carp.
VTTSCMThe Lightning doesn’t fly in the U.K because
The CAA will not allow it, period… when they came into private hands they(CAA) said “NO WAY, to dangerous.”… look at the Barry Pover saga at Exeter, thats why his a/c is in SA. They feel the same way about the Buccaneer, but I believe that she may now stand a chance dependant on 558’s success.
of it’s military safety record in relation especially to in flight fires. It’s a complex type which means it’s ‘engines out bang out’ which also doesn’t appeal to the CAA. The operation of a Lightning and the team to support that task has so far has not met with approval. What the South African and USA authorities choose to do
is up to them but the safety record of military jets in the USA isn’t stunning.
As for Canopus – I am sure that with the right team it could fly again. I should imagine that the Design Authority rests with Airbus UK.Canopus will never fly again because the CAA have said that “she would have to be returned to C4 configeration” not easy…
1] she carries Nimrod undercarriage
2] she only has 2 genuine Comet RR Avons, other 2 are odd….and Avons are now as rare as hens teeth.
3] the boat will have to be removed
4] aerials will have to be removed
5] non standard navigation suite changed
6] have I missed something? has BAE Systems been taken over by Airbus?? BAe Systems were adament they would not support it and would not pass the Design Authority to another company..
7] she has been standing out too long to be a viable propositionIt’s a type that has operated in civil hands and has a good safety record in it’s latter form so I don’t really see it’s as complex as a Vulcan. Possibly it’s a matter that the proposal and team to support that hasn’t met the criteria of the CAA.You might find it interesting to note that the last flight of the Comet
was on the behalf of BAe so maybe they are not entirely indifferent to her.True but title has now passed totally to C Walton Ltd & Cold War Jets Collection and ATC Lasham (Comet experts)have now dropped out
The safety record arguement is completely meaningless. The Concord was almost entirely accident free until the sad events at Paris. Vulcan’s were lost in service so what happened in the past cannot necessary be true for the future.
It has a very strong bearing with the CAA, I can assure you..
Lastly I would suggest a ground school would be a good idea rather than relying on people gaining their experience in the rebuild of a jet.
Ground school has already been set up by Marshalls and VTTST, waiting it’s first studants
There is a world of difference to operating an aircraft and rebuilding it.
….
VTTSCMI am not sure that being operated by volunteers as opposed to a professional company really makes any difference to the operation of an aircraft.
Unfortunatly there is 2 big stumbling blocks to volunteers operating a large heritage jet….
1] the CAA would never allow it…case in point..the Lightning, thats why it only flys in S.Africa & soon the states…. it took some 8yrs to get agreement to even look at the possibility of returning 558…. and one big stipulation NO volunteer labour on the aircraft.
2] A little thing called Design Authority which in the Vulcans case resides with BAe Systems, without their committment you may as well go home, case in point Canopus…. BAe said not interested, only supporting one heritage jet… project to fly Comet 4c died….. unless anyone knows differentIt’s got a lot more to do with the competancy of the ground and aircrew themselves
Ground crew will be drawn from the restoration engineering team
. No amount of money can buy that – they either have the skills or not. The RAF lost Vulcans and indeed we lost Harriers in the airforce.
The Vulcan has the best safety record of ANY military aircraft, anywhere in the world, ever
A completely limitless budget in order to operate
them and some of the best groundcrew in the world couldn’t stop crashes.
As regards the loss of an aircraft such as the Vulcan . Well if it occured away from a display it might be a sad loss. However if it were to be lost with casualties
on the ground you can easily say that air displays would cease to be viable because of insurance.It’s getting that way already, look how many airshows no longer happen???
…
VTTSCMMy turn to appologise to Kev,Lancman, & Bruce..and everbody else out there…..as you will see from the number of my posts, I am a newcomer to the world of Forums… it was my way of differentiating me from the “Quote” material.. I’ll know better in future..
VTTSCM
Firstly, I do apologise for having a contrary opinion to yours. Obviously, you think that shouldn’t be allowed.
“Vast sums of money”
£2.7 million. Needing to go up to £4 million. Of course that’s not a vast sum of money. Mere pocket money…..
The majority of the £4million?? is allocated, after purchase of the airframe, to pay for the engineering skills of the guys who will rebuild the aircraft.. the majority of manufacturers (OEMs) are contributing to the project on a COST or NIL-COST basis for the work they have undertaken.
“NOT IRRESPONSIBLE…. YOU TRY GETTING THE MONIED PEOPLE TO PART WITH £4MILLION QUID”
Does this then imply that the ‘monied people’ might perceive the project to be a bit of a risk? A job was started, strip the aircraft down and let’s see if it will fly. Ok that all seems acceptable. Now, shall we put it back together? Oops we’ve got no money. Let’s tell people we’ll scrap her, perhaps they’ll put their hands in their pockets again. Now we’ve got some money from the HLF we’ll see if we can get more people to donate money. Then, as Janie has said, how about retraining the pilots after a twelve year lay off, the fuel etc., etc., etc. Is this all now part of the £4 miilion? Or is it going to become 5 or 6?
The problem with industrial sponsorship is that, were the head of a company is prepared to donate towards the restoration costs, his accountants wont let him, because they can’t claim it back against tax…. however if the bird was flying they can call it an advertising asset and claim the expenditure back from the govenment.
You know what accountants are like, they don’t like to let anything escape…Here we have a chicken & egg situation..no survey, no support from aviation industry…incidenally I believe there are some 120 companies now signed up the project….. don’t seem that dodgy does it.
Now we come to Janie’s question.. crew training… I have been told that when she first flys, she will treated a a prototype, for she will be a different aircraft from the one that landed in 1993. David Thomas and a CAA test pilot will develop her new flight envelope and then retrain the project’s ex-V force pilots.
The last part the £4million? is purely for the restoration….. as I said above there is a lot of advertising interest out there, waiting for wheels-off….. will come from industrial sponsorship..
If as stated, the Vulcan has been bought for the Nation, then is it not common sense that the people who live in that Nation might have an opinion about what to do with said project?
“ANYWAY WHY SHOULD SHE GO DOWN WHEN SHE WILL BE OPERATED AS A PROFFESIONAL COMPANY, NOT A VOUNTEER IN SIGHT. (A CAA PRE-REQUISITE)”
Not doubting for a moment that the aircraft, should it fly, will be operated professionally. That does not stop accidents. No company is immune to that. Tell American Airlines, British Airways, THY, Swissair, EL AL, Korean Air Lines and any number of other professional companies who have lost aircraft in accidents Even the RAF lost a couple. I stand by my belief that should an aircraft of this complexity come to grief that the airshow scene would largely cease to exist. The outcry over the crash of a single or two seater aircraft is enormous. “Stunt pilots” etc. The Press don’t have to be right, but they have a far bigger voice than the preservation movement.
Air travel is by far the safest form of travel..and the companies you quote have hundreds/thousands of aircraft in the air at any one time, flying for thousands of hours a day each, VTTST will have one aircraft that will only fly a mere 40-60 hours a YEAR. The law of averages is on their side..
Regarding her complexity… she is NOT a complex airframe, like say the Victor, she is in fact an intermeadiate, but the CAA insisted she be classified as complex.
THE PRESS… I would rather not comment, if I was in the states I would take the 5th)The static Vulcan will be extinct except for those undercover. We will be very lucky then with one at Hendon and one at Cosford. What will happen to 558 when its brief resurrection is over? Does it remain taxyable? Will it stay undercover? Where? Bruntingthorpe? Duxford?
Brief resurrection.. this could be as long as 15yrs of flight, so I am told, but again if you had done your research you would know that the HLF stipulated on final grounding, she will go to the National Collection at Duxford and be kept undercover and in a fast taxy condition for as long as possible… who knows she could still be howling in 25yrs time, long after I have gone. As to what will happen to their present Vulcan you will have to ask them..
Vested interest? No. I am not a member of any preservation group nor do I own anything which requires restoration. With the possible exception of my wheelchair. I personally believe this is the wrong airframe for the HLF to have invested in. Especially as it is, in your words, a one off.
Sorry I miss read what was written by you before…. I do note that you have ducked the questions I posed before
a] which airframe is more deserving??
b] Is it not an education project??? when she flys she will be taken to local airports where a travelling roadshow will be set up and all the local schools/colledges will be invited to see the aircraft and take part in workshops/lectures/presentations on the cold war, history of aviation engineering etc..
She will be a living college and museum for the future generations…. and a damb good airshow item…..We will have to agree to differ. If it ever flies, and I have doubts that it ever will, I sincerely hope it is safe.
I hope I have gone some way to alleviate your fears about this project.. I just wish I could be involved more than just a club member supporting 558 & VTTST
I look forward to your reply. See if you can do it without shouting.
Once again I do appologise but in my defence I didn’t understand the convensions..Regards,
kev35
VTTSCM.
I don’t understand why a group, who, if I’ve read the link correctly didn’t even own the aircraft, decided to turn it from a perfectly good Vulcan into several hundred boxes of bits without knowing whether they’d ever have the financial resources to put it back together.
FIRST….AT THE TIME OF DISMANTLING, TVOC WAS A DIVISION OF
C WALTON Ltd… THEREFORE THEY DID OWN THE AIRFRAME!!! As to the wisdom of dismantling ‘558.. this was the only way to determine the condition of the structure and whether it was a viable proposition to rebuild… BAe’s pre-requisite for their involvment, I believe..And then getting people to repeatedly pledge money to the dream only to have the timeline extended seems irresponsible to me.
NOT IRRESPONSIBLE…. YOU TRY GETTING THE MONIED PEOPLE TO PART WITH £4MILLION QUID
From the VTS website.
Your glass may be half full xh558tothesky, mine however, is emptying fast as enormous sums of money are being channelled into this project.
WHAT ENORMOUS SUMS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? APART FROM WHAT C WALTON Ltd HAS FUNDED, NO GREAT SUMS HAVE BEEN SPENT, BECAUSE UNTIL THE HLF CAME ALONG, THE PROJECT WAS ALWAYS SHORT OF CASH, BECAUSE CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP WAS NOT FORTHCOMING,
I have serious reservations about this aircraft flying ever again. As I’ve said previously, and God forbid it should ever happen, but what if it went down performing a routine or in transit? It would be the end of airshows.
THAT GOES FOR ANY AIRFRAME, THE AIRSHOW SCENE HAS SURVIVED ACCIDENTS IN THE PAST…. ANYWAY WHY SHOULD SHE GO DOWN WHEN SHE WILL BE OPERATED AS A PROFFESIONAL COMPANY, NOT A VOUNTEER IN SIGHT. (A CAA PRE-REQUISITE)
“Heritage Lottery Fund regional manager for the East Midlands Sheila Stone said: “The Avro Vulcan has played an important role in the country’s aviation history and I am pleased that we have been able to support XH558’s acquisition and uniquely in this instance, restoration to full flying condition.”
Surely £2.7 million pounds could have found either a) a more worthy type to restore, b)gone toward housing far rarer airframes which are near extinct or c) gone towards an educational project to perpetuate the memories of those who served this Country in time of war and to recording their memories while we still have the chance.
a] WHAT IS A MORE WORTHY TYPE? SHE IS THE ONLY VFORCE AIRCRFT THAT CAN BE RETURNED TO FLIGHT..
b] BY IT’S VERY NATURE, EXCEPT THOSE UNDERCOVER, THE STATIC VULCAN AIRFRAME WILL BE EXTINCT IN A FEW YEARS… EXAMPLE THE BLACKPOOL ONE..AND UNFORTUNATLY XM607 BLACKBUCK 1 IS NOT IN TOO GOOD A CONDITION, THEY ROT VERY QUICKLY… ‘558 HAS SURVIVED IN SUCH GOOD CONDITION, BECAUSE SHE HAS HAD A LOT MORE TLC THAN ANY OF HER SISTERS.
c] EDUCATION…THIS IS THE WHOLE ETHOS OF VTTST’s PROJECT AND THE MAIN REASON THAT THE HLF ARE SUPPORTING IT….. IT IS AN EDUCATIONAL PROJECT…… THE COLD WAR IS NOW PART OF THE NATIONAL CURRICULUM, YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT FULLY RESEARCHED THE PROJECT OR YOU WOULD HAVE KNOWN THIS SIMPLE FACT….
XL391“I would rather stay positive and would like to think that things are now go, as opposed to slagging it off.”
I’m not slagging it off, I just don’t agree with the project. I’m not convinced it is viable commercially, that it would be wise to operate such a complex airframe, and that there aren’t a thousand more deserving projects out there, grass roots individuals and restorers, who wouldn’t have benefitted more from a share of the £2.7 million pounds, some of which I am responsible for.
AHHHH.. DO I DETECT A BIT OF VESTED INTEREST HERE??…. HAVE YOU TRIED AND FAILED TO GET LOTTERY FUNDING??
THEY HAVE SAID THAT THEIR RULES DO ALLOW THEM TO FUND A FLYING AIRCRAFT, WHICH IS WHY THEY WILL HAVE NO COMMITMENT TO THE OPERATIONAL PART OF THE PROJECT AND AS FAR AS THEY ARE CONCERNED, THIS PROJECT IS A ONE OFF..
Regards,
kev35
.
VTTSCMI’ve just been looking at the Vulcan website whereby, lucky us, we can choose and pay for a component.
I reckon I can save £900 for them straight away. Because that is how much they are charging for ‘the co-pilot’s pee tube.’
Just don’t give him a drink before he goes up or buy him one of those devices for urinating in that is attached to a leg bag.
I might be wrong but I think that’s REALLY taking the pee.
Regards,
kev35
Do you seriously believe that prices quoted are to refurbish said item?? it would appear to me that this is just another way to raise the rest of the matched funding, it must be getting very difficult for the team to come up with new or novel ways to raise money… I think this one is quite novel, to “sell” ownership of components. From what I have seen of Kev35s bellyaching on this forum nothing will please him with this project..
Sign In
