Discussion
Scaleybrat said:
I can only think the different responses is mainly down to the way VTTS has managed the Vulcan, especially since it’s grounding and the apparent squandering of money. By contrast, The Shackleton Aviation Group is run by a group of volunteers and their income appears to come from engine-run events, merchandise, donations and Friends of WR963 membership. Nobody has filled their pockets, just a dedicated team wanting to keep the memory of the Shackleton alive. Admittedly, they had plans to return her to flight but I think that’s a very distant (impossible) dream.
My point? I don’t think there is any issue with XH558 as an airframe, it would be great if it could be kept as a runner and would still be a crowd pleaser. What has to change is it’s ownership and future management. It may already be too late but I hope something can be done to keep her from the scrap merchant’s yard.
Pretty accurate summation.My point? I don’t think there is any issue with XH558 as an airframe, it would be great if it could be kept as a runner and would still be a crowd pleaser. What has to change is it’s ownership and future management. It may already be too late but I hope something can be done to keep her from the scrap merchant’s yard.
There was 'possibly' a good chance '558 'could' have gone to Elvington in 2015, had VTTS been would up at that point, after making whatever donation to YAM that they had left in the coffers with her upkeep transferring to a volunteer team. They might have even been enough for some sort of lightweight hangar for both 558 and Lusty Lindy.
Because VTTS are intent on trying to keep lining their own pockets at the expense of the long term future of '558 means that only the non-enthusiast based fan-club are on their side that was never an option, places would take the Vulcan, but not the Vulcan & VTTS.....which is why they wanted to keep going it alone.....as it was 'their aircraft' to do with as they pleased......despite the blindingly obvious to everyone else, of that money source drying up as the years passed by, which was always going to put the aircraft's future in doubt.
And so it has come to pass, albeit a few years before most expected it to happen.
Yertis said:
But I will never, ever, refer to a broken down aircraft as having ‘gone tech’.
I've been fixing flying things of various types for the best part of 40 years and hadn't heard that phrase used until a couple of years ago, and then it was by a spotter. Generally it's U/S or just tits.dr_gn said:
Isn’t the ‘tail’ of an aircraft anything around the rear of the fuselage, which usually has a tailplane and a tail fin attached to it?
So ‘tail number” is correct if the number is on the fuselage or fin (like the Vulcan) - it’s just a generic term for a number at the rear of an aircraft?
The bit you're on about is called the aft fuselage So ‘tail number” is correct if the number is on the fuselage or fin (like the Vulcan) - it’s just a generic term for a number at the rear of an aircraft?
. If you're being posh, all the bits attached to the aft fuselage is called the empennage 
eccles said:
The bit you're on about is called the aft fuselage . If you're being posh, all the bits attached to the aft fuselage is called the empennage
…but surely the ‘tail’ is still just the back of the aircraft in general, like the ‘nose’ is the front? . If you're being posh, all the bits attached to the aft fuselage is called the empennage So the tail is aft fuselage and empennage, the empennage comprises the fin and rudder, tailplane and elevators?
dr_gn said:
…but surely the ‘tail’ is still just the back of the aircraft in general, like the ‘nose’ is the front?
So the tail is aft fuselage and empennage, the empennage comprises the fin and rudder, tailplane and elevators?
Aircraft are broken up into zones (wings are zones 500 and 600, undercarriage zone 700 etc) with the fuselage being two zones (zone 100 being lower, and zone 200 being upper) and the empennage consisting of the Fin/rudder and tailplane/elevators is zone 300.So the tail is aft fuselage and empennage, the empennage comprises the fin and rudder, tailplane and elevators?
So while you could just say 'back end or 'nose' If you say tail to someone in the trade you'd expect it to mean sticky out bits at the back rather than the aft fuselage.
Scaleybrat said:
I’ve been reading this topic and it’s interesting that there are two aircraft with similar circumstances and predicaments. They are both ex-RAF aircraft, have the capability to taxi under their own steam but are ‘grounded’ and are being evicted from their current locations so are looking to move next year. XH558 has its challenges which are well discussed here although the underlying tone seems to be that there are plenty other Vulcans in UK, including one’s with taxi capability, so just let the scrappies get their mitts on it. Over in Coventry, another Avro aircraft, in the shape of Shackleton WR963, is now facing a move as the airfield is going to be built on. They have already identified Elvington as it’s new home and Yorkshire Air Museum are ready to accept it into their collection. Similar to the Vulcan, there are other examples of Shackleton aircraft in UK, although I think WR963 is the only one capable of taxying. Unlike the reaction to XH558’s current plight, the overall reaction to WR963’s move to Yorkshire is very positive.
I can only think the different responses is mainly down to the way VTTS has managed the Vulcan, especially since it’s grounding and the apparent squandering of money. By contrast, The Shackleton Aviation Group is run by a group of volunteers and their income appears to come from engine-run events, merchandise, donations and Friends of WR963 membership. Nobody has filled their pockets, just a dedicated team wanting to keep the memory of the Shackleton alive. Admittedly, they had plans to return her to flight but I think that’s a very distant (impossible) dream.
My point? I don’t think there is any issue with XH558 as an airframe, it would be great if it could be kept as a runner and would still be a crowd pleaser. What has to change is it’s ownership and future management. It may already be too late but I hope something can be done to keep her from the scrap merchant’s yard.
I have no allegiance to the Shackleton or it’s volunteers and members. I just find it an interesting comparison at this time.
There's been numerous parallels over the past few years. The dream of flight may be an impossible one, but its always been kept as an option just in case that angel investor shows up with a burning desire to see a flying Shackleton.I can only think the different responses is mainly down to the way VTTS has managed the Vulcan, especially since it’s grounding and the apparent squandering of money. By contrast, The Shackleton Aviation Group is run by a group of volunteers and their income appears to come from engine-run events, merchandise, donations and Friends of WR963 membership. Nobody has filled their pockets, just a dedicated team wanting to keep the memory of the Shackleton alive. Admittedly, they had plans to return her to flight but I think that’s a very distant (impossible) dream.
My point? I don’t think there is any issue with XH558 as an airframe, it would be great if it could be kept as a runner and would still be a crowd pleaser. What has to change is it’s ownership and future management. It may already be too late but I hope something can be done to keep her from the scrap merchant’s yard.
I have no allegiance to the Shackleton or it’s volunteers and members. I just find it an interesting comparison at this time.
The next comparison will be next year when we start the process of moving the aircraft from Coventry to Elvington.
As an interesting aside, one of the people instrumental in brokering our move is Martin Withers..
richw_82 said:
There's been numerous parallels over the past few years. The dream of flight may be an impossible one, but its always been kept as an option just in case that angel investor shows up with a burning desire to see a flying Shackleton.
The next comparison will be next year when we start the process of moving the aircraft from Coventry to Elvington.
As an interesting aside, one of the people instrumental in brokering our move is Martin Withers..
How much of a pain in the arse is taking a Shackleton's wings off and on?The next comparison will be next year when we start the process of moving the aircraft from Coventry to Elvington.
As an interesting aside, one of the people instrumental in brokering our move is Martin Withers..
richw_82 said:
Scaleybrat said:
I’ve been reading this topic and it’s interesting that there are two aircraft with similar circumstances and predicaments. They are both ex-RAF aircraft, have the capability to taxi under their own steam but are ‘grounded’ and are being evicted from their current locations so are looking to move next year. XH558 has its challenges which are well discussed here although the underlying tone seems to be that there are plenty other Vulcans in UK, including one’s with taxi capability, so just let the scrappies get their mitts on it. Over in Coventry, another Avro aircraft, in the shape of Shackleton WR963, is now facing a move as the airfield is going to be built on. They have already identified Elvington as it’s new home and Yorkshire Air Museum are ready to accept it into their collection. Similar to the Vulcan, there are other examples of Shackleton aircraft in UK, although I think WR963 is the only one capable of taxying. Unlike the reaction to XH558’s current plight, the overall reaction to WR963’s move to Yorkshire is very positive.
I can only think the different responses is mainly down to the way VTTS has managed the Vulcan, especially since it’s grounding and the apparent squandering of money. By contrast, The Shackleton Aviation Group is run by a group of volunteers and their income appears to come from engine-run events, merchandise, donations and Friends of WR963 membership. Nobody has filled their pockets, just a dedicated team wanting to keep the memory of the Shackleton alive. Admittedly, they had plans to return her to flight but I think that’s a very distant (impossible) dream.
My point? I don’t think there is any issue with XH558 as an airframe, it would be great if it could be kept as a runner and would still be a crowd pleaser. What has to change is it’s ownership and future management. It may already be too late but I hope something can be done to keep her from the scrap merchant’s yard.
I have no allegiance to the Shackleton or it’s volunteers and members. I just find it an interesting comparison at this time.
There's been numerous parallels over the past few years. The dream of flight may be an impossible one, but its always been kept as an option just in case that angel investor shows up with a burning desire to see a flying Shackleton.I can only think the different responses is mainly down to the way VTTS has managed the Vulcan, especially since it’s grounding and the apparent squandering of money. By contrast, The Shackleton Aviation Group is run by a group of volunteers and their income appears to come from engine-run events, merchandise, donations and Friends of WR963 membership. Nobody has filled their pockets, just a dedicated team wanting to keep the memory of the Shackleton alive. Admittedly, they had plans to return her to flight but I think that’s a very distant (impossible) dream.
My point? I don’t think there is any issue with XH558 as an airframe, it would be great if it could be kept as a runner and would still be a crowd pleaser. What has to change is it’s ownership and future management. It may already be too late but I hope something can be done to keep her from the scrap merchant’s yard.
I have no allegiance to the Shackleton or it’s volunteers and members. I just find it an interesting comparison at this time.
The next comparison will be next year when we start the process of moving the aircraft from Coventry to Elvington.
As an interesting aside, one of the people instrumental in brokering our move is Martin Withers..
hidetheelephants said:
How much of a pain in the arse is taking a Shackleton's wings off and on?
If I look at it from the point of view that I don't want to have to - a lot!In engineering terms, its fairly simple, there are transport joints just beyond each inboard engine. Its a legacy of it being a derivative of the Lancaster that a Shackleton breaks down into fairly small chunks.
richw_82 said:
hidetheelephants said:
How much of a pain in the arse is taking a Shackleton's wings off and on?
If I look at it from the point of view that I don't want to have to - a lot!In engineering terms, its fairly simple, there are transport joints just beyond each inboard engine. Its a legacy of it being a derivative of the Lancaster that a Shackleton breaks down into fairly small chunks.
Scaley; thanks.
I don't like seeing any historic aircraft in peril, but unless VTST stop making too many inflexible demands the list of potential new sites won't get much bigger.
One thing that always makes me wonder, is the cost of hangarage at DSA? Had they used some of the money raised and paid rather than trying to survive rent free, XH558 would probably never had to live outside. A leased hangar is still better than nothing, even if its not the shiny new STEM centre you were looking for.
I don't like seeing any historic aircraft in peril, but unless VTST stop making too many inflexible demands the list of potential new sites won't get much bigger.
One thing that always makes me wonder, is the cost of hangarage at DSA? Had they used some of the money raised and paid rather than trying to survive rent free, XH558 would probably never had to live outside. A leased hangar is still better than nothing, even if its not the shiny new STEM centre you were looking for.
richw_82 said:
I don't like seeing any historic aircraft in peril, but unless VTST stop making too many inflexible demands the list of potential new sites won't get much bigger.
Very much so. They are their own worst enemy. Too interested in keeping their wallets lined rather than safeguarding the aircraft.Back in 2015 many people started re-writing VTTS as standing for Vulcan To The Skip........because of what many considered in time would be the ultimate end to the VTTS saga.
richw_82 said:
One thing that always makes me wonder, is the cost of hangarage at DSA? Had they used some of the money raised and paid rather than trying to survive rent free, XH558 would probably never had to live outside. A leased hangar is still better than nothing, even if its not the shiny new STEM centre you were looking for.
Maybe, although it seems that the condition from Peel for staying on the site was them raising the funds to effectively buy the plot of land for the new building, thereby securing the future independent of whatever Peel would do with the site, even if that meant the end of the airport and an end to 558 being a live aircraft with a runway to exercise on. (I presume this was likely to be that bit of land up in the north end next to the water treatment plant giving them an entrance from Hayfield Lane?)VTTS failure to achieve this by a certain date, terminated any contract with Peel, and therefore Peel serving eviction notice on them, as per Peel Group's statement.
richw_82 said:
I was thinking more before that, when they were moved out of the hangar they occupied so that 2Excel(?) could move in. Pretty much the only reason was that the new tenant was willing to pay commercial rates, and VTST weren't.
I suppose, in their way of thinking, not paying commercial rent would mean they could raise the money for the land/building of their vanity project.Not spunking over £600k on advertising might have been a better money saving plan though in the grand scheme of things
eccles said:
Yertis said:
But I will never, ever, refer to a broken down aircraft as having ‘gone tech’.
I've been fixing flying things of various types for the best part of 40 years and hadn't heard that phrase used until a couple of years ago, and then it was by a spotter. Generally it's U/S or just tits.if a crew member isn’t available due to being sick - they’ve gone sick
if an aircraft isn’t available due to technical issues - it’s gone tech
It’s like if someone has gone awol etc
I suppose if you’re an engineer or technician you’re unlikely to say it’s gone tech to each other as you’re probably working on it and it’s not really gone anywhere or missing but if it was stuck down route, someone might say “it’s gone tech down route” etc.
Our engineering department would probably say it’s unserviceable or got a technical issue etc but they definitely say it’s gone tech sometimes also, especially if it’s not where it ought to be.
If I was on the aircraft and speaking to crew I’d say it was unserviceable, broken or we’re not going anywhere at the moment, I probably wouldn’t say it’s gone tech as we’re on it.
If I was speaking to passengers about it I wouldn’t say it’s gone tech though or use any aviation colloquialisms at all, I’d say it needs some work done before we can depart or there’s a technical issue at the moment etc
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 21st August 08:43
A long statement from VTTS this week that actually manages to say very little ...
"XH558 UPDATE: 26th AUGUST
Since being told that our agreement for parking our aircraft at Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA) will not be renewed in June 2023, and that we would have to leave the site at that time, the Trustees and the VTST team have been very busy.
We recently let you know that we have two potential sites in negotiation, where we know that Vulcan XH558 will be protected for decades to come. The sites would deliver Dr Robert Pleming’s vision of telling the Cold War story and the role of the V-Force and inspiring youngsters to pursue meaningful and productive careers in engineering. The sites also provide much greater access for supporters to come and see XH558 up close.
We have options of where to go, but our challenge is how to get there. We have been investigating the potential of a one-off ferry flight for XH558 to leave DSA. The alternative is to dismantle and move and rebuild XH558 in her dedicated permanent home.
While we were always informed that we would not get approval for her to fly again by the CAA, we have recently been told that “the CAA rules may have changed”. In hearing that a ferry flight might be a potential option, it is not something that we could ignore.
Vulcan XH558 flew in the Complex category and to date remains the only ‘complex’ one to be returned to the Civil Aviation register. A condition of the Complex category, and a legal requirement, is that the aircraft’s Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) or a Design Authority are contracted to provide ongoing airworthiness design support. Back in 2015, the OEMs notified the Trust that this support was to be withdrawn at the end of that year, as they felt that they could not find people with sufficient expertise to help. This meant XH558 was no longer allowed to fly.
In our current discussions with the CAA, we have been told the rules have not changed. A Design Authority is still a legal requirement, even for a short ferry flight. The VTST team are working hard to explore if there are any Design Authorities able to support an aircraft as complex as the Vulcan for a one-off ferry flight.
In June 2004, the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) granted £2.7million for XH558’s restoration. The Trust maintains regular contact with the HLF and have apprised them of the current situation. The scope of the grant from the HLF also included the provision of public access to XH558 on the ground, and the setup of educational activities to tell the story of the Cold War and to provide lessons for schoolchildren in technology, engineering and maths based on the aircraft and her operation. At the time of approval, the HLF’s Chair, Liz Forgan, said: “In the normal way of things we do not restore aircraft to flight but the HLF was really impressed with the imaginative way in which the Trust’s new proposal will let as many people as possible learn about this important part of their heritage.”
Due to the business requirements of DSA, in January 2017, XH558 had to move out of Hangar 3. Since then, delivering our educational message has been challenging, but not impossible. We have had many successes working with local schools and education centres, such as partnering with Doncaster UTC on an employer-led engineering project, which saw the students using the original plans and sketches of the Vulcan, an iconic example of British aeronautical design excellence. Their task was to redesign the wing of the aircraft using modern materials and manufacturing processes.
The project helped towards a decision to award the UTC the award for New Educational Institution of the year – UK.
In partnership with The Work-wise Foundation and CBE+, we invited secondary schools to design an interactive exhibition to display an original Bomb-Bay Fuel Tank which was removed from Vulcan XH558. The fuel tank was installed inside XH558 when she landed at Bruntingthorpe airfield on her final flight in RAF service and was removed as part of the return to flight project. The winning design and all other entries were displayed alongside Vulcan XH558’s Bomb-Bay Fuel Tank at Get up to Speed with STEM on 23 March 2022 at Magna Science Adventure Centre.
This year sees the launch of Dr Pleming’s Delta Wing Project. The project asks both Primary and Secondary schools from the Delta Academies Trust to get involved in creating displays to showcase the Delta Wing of Vulcan XH558. These are just a few examples of the exiting projects that Vulcan XH558 is involved with. These outreach projects are testimony to the effect that the Vulcan has on inspiring young people.
The HLF remains supportive of the Trust’s plans and will be part of the decision-making process of securing XH558’s long-term future in a home where we can fully deliver Robert’s vision of telling the story of the RAF, its people and the Cold War based around the V-Force and the famous Avro Vulcan XH558, and inspiring future generations to pursue meaningful and productive careers in science, technology, engineering and maths roles.
We will update you with more news as soon as we are able to"
"XH558 UPDATE: 26th AUGUST
Since being told that our agreement for parking our aircraft at Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA) will not be renewed in June 2023, and that we would have to leave the site at that time, the Trustees and the VTST team have been very busy.
We recently let you know that we have two potential sites in negotiation, where we know that Vulcan XH558 will be protected for decades to come. The sites would deliver Dr Robert Pleming’s vision of telling the Cold War story and the role of the V-Force and inspiring youngsters to pursue meaningful and productive careers in engineering. The sites also provide much greater access for supporters to come and see XH558 up close.
We have options of where to go, but our challenge is how to get there. We have been investigating the potential of a one-off ferry flight for XH558 to leave DSA. The alternative is to dismantle and move and rebuild XH558 in her dedicated permanent home.
While we were always informed that we would not get approval for her to fly again by the CAA, we have recently been told that “the CAA rules may have changed”. In hearing that a ferry flight might be a potential option, it is not something that we could ignore.
Vulcan XH558 flew in the Complex category and to date remains the only ‘complex’ one to be returned to the Civil Aviation register. A condition of the Complex category, and a legal requirement, is that the aircraft’s Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) or a Design Authority are contracted to provide ongoing airworthiness design support. Back in 2015, the OEMs notified the Trust that this support was to be withdrawn at the end of that year, as they felt that they could not find people with sufficient expertise to help. This meant XH558 was no longer allowed to fly.
In our current discussions with the CAA, we have been told the rules have not changed. A Design Authority is still a legal requirement, even for a short ferry flight. The VTST team are working hard to explore if there are any Design Authorities able to support an aircraft as complex as the Vulcan for a one-off ferry flight.
In June 2004, the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) granted £2.7million for XH558’s restoration. The Trust maintains regular contact with the HLF and have apprised them of the current situation. The scope of the grant from the HLF also included the provision of public access to XH558 on the ground, and the setup of educational activities to tell the story of the Cold War and to provide lessons for schoolchildren in technology, engineering and maths based on the aircraft and her operation. At the time of approval, the HLF’s Chair, Liz Forgan, said: “In the normal way of things we do not restore aircraft to flight but the HLF was really impressed with the imaginative way in which the Trust’s new proposal will let as many people as possible learn about this important part of their heritage.”
Due to the business requirements of DSA, in January 2017, XH558 had to move out of Hangar 3. Since then, delivering our educational message has been challenging, but not impossible. We have had many successes working with local schools and education centres, such as partnering with Doncaster UTC on an employer-led engineering project, which saw the students using the original plans and sketches of the Vulcan, an iconic example of British aeronautical design excellence. Their task was to redesign the wing of the aircraft using modern materials and manufacturing processes.
The project helped towards a decision to award the UTC the award for New Educational Institution of the year – UK.
In partnership with The Work-wise Foundation and CBE+, we invited secondary schools to design an interactive exhibition to display an original Bomb-Bay Fuel Tank which was removed from Vulcan XH558. The fuel tank was installed inside XH558 when she landed at Bruntingthorpe airfield on her final flight in RAF service and was removed as part of the return to flight project. The winning design and all other entries were displayed alongside Vulcan XH558’s Bomb-Bay Fuel Tank at Get up to Speed with STEM on 23 March 2022 at Magna Science Adventure Centre.
This year sees the launch of Dr Pleming’s Delta Wing Project. The project asks both Primary and Secondary schools from the Delta Academies Trust to get involved in creating displays to showcase the Delta Wing of Vulcan XH558. These are just a few examples of the exiting projects that Vulcan XH558 is involved with. These outreach projects are testimony to the effect that the Vulcan has on inspiring young people.
The HLF remains supportive of the Trust’s plans and will be part of the decision-making process of securing XH558’s long-term future in a home where we can fully deliver Robert’s vision of telling the story of the RAF, its people and the Cold War based around the V-Force and the famous Avro Vulcan XH558, and inspiring future generations to pursue meaningful and productive careers in science, technology, engineering and maths roles.
We will update you with more news as soon as we are able to"
To me, that just reads like a justification from VTST for their continued ownership of XH558 but contains nothing new on the most important topic of where it’s going and how it’s getting there. They state two possible locations, do we know which sites are being considered? Presumably both have an active runway as they don’t seem to have dismissed possibilities of flying the aircraft out of Finningley.
Quoting the Heritage Lottery Fund and VTST’s previous promises for its future use as an educational tool - surely, they can’t be looking for further lottery money to fund the move?
Quoting the Heritage Lottery Fund and VTST’s previous promises for its future use as an educational tool - surely, they can’t be looking for further lottery money to fund the move?
Scaleybrat said:
To me, that just reads like a justification from VTST for their continued ownership of XH558
To me it just reads as justification for their own existence - as in, "look how much work we're doing behind the scenes" and "this justifies us paying ourselves an exorbitant amount of money"Scaleybrat said:
To me, that just reads like a justification from VTST for their continued ownership of XH558 but contains nothing new on the most important topic of where it’s going and how it’s getting there.
Indeed.However in fairness to Vulcan To The Skip......they are not going to say where its going until they know which location it is. Only then can they try and fund the move to that location.
It annoys me the way they start off by saying, "we heard that the rules may have changed regarding a ferry flight" before then having to admit that, they haven't......which just proves what a bunch of cretins they are, and paints them not fit to fly the thing, even if they could. The fact they say they are trying to find a DA that would support a one-off ferry flight just smacks of trying to give hope where there is none. Marshall's clearly want nothing to do with it again, and when they returned it to flight, they were the ONLY option of a DA. If they had said no back in 2007 or when ever it was, then it would have never flown again. There's no mention of RR, as they would have to support it as well, and they were the ones that pressed for it being grounded back in 2015, so.....
Scampton makes sense as it was a Vulcan base for so many years, and part of the site is listed can't all be built on. '558 could form part of a museum etc on the site, along with the listed parts - if local councils etc were supportive.....along with what ever housing or light industrial plans they have for it.
The south wales option I guess is the museum next to St.Athan, which was associated with Vulcan servicing and overhaul for many years.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff