Save the last flying Vulcan

[Strider]

The last flying Vulcan is close to running out of money again. The charity that operates her is making a lot more commercially now, but they still need our help to get her back in the air for 2012. Lots of ideas on www.vulcantothesky.org and also a Facebook page, Vulcan xh558. Thanks everyone.

[XG332]

I think the XH558 thread is huge. How did you miss it?

[Strider]

There hasnt been a post since July 2011 so huge but hardly prominent. Unless there is another that I've missed.

[Eric Mc]

The thread tends to get resurrected once the airshow season starts approaching and the calls for monetary support go out.

[Elroy Blue]

Its proving to be a bottomless pit. I'd rather see a Shackleton flying again.

[Eric Mc]

It was always ever going to be. But, if we want to see a flying Vulcan, then we must be prepared to dip into our pockets.

[Sam_68]

Eric Mc said:

...if we want to see a flying Vulcan, then we must be prepared to dip into our pockets.

Surely it should be taxpayer funded, like the museums, Eric?

It's an important part of our national heritage, after all?

[Eric Mc]

Sam_68 said:

Eric Mc said:

...if we want to see a flying Vulcan, then we must be prepared to dip into our pockets.

Surely it should be taxpayer funded, like the museums, Eric?

It's an important part of our national heritage, after all?

Of course. Nice to see we agree on something. Unfortunately, it isn't - so this is what we have to do.

The fact that the Vulcan struggles from year to year priocesly SUPPORTS an argument for state funding of such important icons.

And it did receive £2 million of Lottery funding, so it has had some state support.

[Sam_68]

Eric Mc said:

The fact that the Vulcan struggles from year to year yet still manages to get by demonstrates that it can be done without imposing an additional burden on the taxpayer.

EFA.

I find it interesting that you're quite willing to suggest that we dip into our pockets to maintain the Vulcan, yet are appalled at the idea of those who directly enjoy the benefits having to contribute similarly toward some the cost of museums?

But inconsistencies and hypocracy aside... I would have thought that it would make more sense to merge the 'Vulcan to the Skies' project with an RAF 'Heritage flight', along with the battle of britain flight and possibly as a 'replacement' for the Vintage Pair.

This would ensure the survival and proper maintenance of the Vulcan and would fit with my proposed model of only partial state funding of heritage assets, since a substantial portion of operating costs could be met by public entrance fees at the events it attends.

[Eric Mc]

Here we ho again.

I'm not going to reply to any of Sam's comments as he sounds like the proverbial stuck record. Perhaps he should be renamed "Sam78".

[Sam_68]

Sorry, Eric; I just couldn't help but notice the irony of your 'we must be prepared to dip into our pockets' on the one thread, versus 'it's crucial for our nation's wellbeing that access for all to our heritage is funded by the taxpayer', on the other.

I just think that there's a sensible middle ground that can be applied in both cases.

[Simpo Two]

I think Eric means 'we' as in everyone/ie the State.

Funding things from the State is effectively invisible ('Ooh look it's free!), whilst Mr & Mrs Jones having to stump up a few £ to visit a museum is visible/a deterrent. And so they go dahn the pub instead.

[Eric Mc]

Don't feed him. He's likely to ruin yet another thread. Perhaps I'll go and resurrect the proper Vulcan thread so this one can now close.

[Sam_68]

Don't I recall that the nation hosting the Olympics is allowed to introduce a 'guest sport'?

Do you think it's too late to change ours to 'dummy spitting', so that we could be assured of at least one gold medal?

[marcosgt]

It's an amazing plane, but do we really need to keep it flying?

Concorde was, in reality, much more of a technical triumph and yet no-one dug in their pocket to keep that flying (although some of that was political no-doubt...).

Are any of the other V bombers still flying? If not, why didn't people bother to support them?

M.

[Streps]

marcosgt said:

It's an amazing plane, but do we really need to keep it flying?

Concorde was, in reality, much more of a technical triumph and yet no-one dug in their pocket to keep that flying (although some of that was political no-doubt...).

Are any of the other V bombers still flying? If not, why didn't people bother to support them?

M.

As long as they have the spares and funds.. and airframe capable.. why not!
I'd never seen a Vulcan in the air until last year.. it is completely different to looking at old pictures.

I would love to see Bruntingthorpe's Victor, XM715 in the air again.


It good the Vulcan is still flying as it played an important role in the cold war and the Falklands

Just as the BBMF Lancaster bomber deserves to fly. (working museum piece in it's natural environment)
It would be great if the government gave it more backing.

[Eric Mc]

The government did keep it flying for ten years (1983-93) but in the end the costs of keeping it in the air were deemed just too much. It won't be flying for a great many more years anyway due to a lack of available low hours engines.

[Petrolhead_Rich]

Sam_68 said:

Eric Mc said:

...if we want to see a flying Vulcan, then we must be prepared to dip into our pockets.

Surely it should be taxpayer funded, like the museums, Eric?

It's an important part of our national heritage, after all?

Given the current situation in the Falklands, I think the RAF should pay for the next couple of years running and arm it.

Think the Argentinians might decide they don't want to loose again and go home!

[stuartmmcfc]

I know it's an expensive operation but it seems to be a bit of a bottom less pit.
I was very keen and supported it before it even before it started flying.
So far I reckon I've put in over £200 towards it and yet I still keep on getting letters telling me how they're only days from having to ground it .
I know it's an expensive operation but didn't anyone realise this at the start and take the appropiate steps rather than staggering from one financial disaster to another?
Personally I've got no spare money but even if i had i 'm not sure i'd continue to support it,

[Eric Mc]

The big thing that is lacking is large scale corporate sponsorship. Believe, they have tried very hard to obtain this but not many companies seem willing to support it. Maybe RBS could give money to the Vulcan rather than their Chief Exex?