Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - wcg

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 72
1
As I posted on UKAR, with regards the 'Founding Guardians'....

Quote
I saw the following ( from May this year)...
There were somewhere around 2,200 Club Members who joined the 'FG' scheme when the VTTS Club was binned -- that's less than half the people who were Club Members at the time.
Some have left since then, others on the Forum are saying they'll not be renewing their membership.
If the membership's still £21, that's a total income of just over £46k ...... not a lot compared to what the Club Membership and the various fundraising schemes & Club shop used to bring in.
You could say that it probably pays less than 2 peoples' wages. >:D

Happy to be corrected on those figures if anyone's got more accurate ones.

And no, unless they suddenly find another mystery benefactor I don't see it happening.

2
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 15, 2017, 04:57:40 PM »
From today's newsletter, for those who don't get it....

Quote
We have been led to expect the determination on our New Heritage Hangar planning application before the end of the year, so just as soon as we have news on the decision, we will advise you in the first available newsletter and across our social media channels of Facebook and Twitter. 

3
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 08, 2017, 02:04:49 PM »
They hid that away well !

4
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 08, 2017, 12:44:34 PM »
Andy;
I couldn't find anything either, until 'Microlightdriver' pointed out that the 'Forum' button on the horizontal row ( between 'History/Articles' & 'How to help' ) is labelled incorrectly !
It actually takes you to what used to be the 'Club' page & simply states the following :
Quote
For all enquiries regarding the Founding Guardians please contact our office - details below.

Please do not try to contact the Vulcan to the Sky Club office as it is now closed.

The Vulcan Marketing Company
Office: 12 Dunns Close Nuneaton, Warwickshire. CV11 4NF. United Kingdom.

Telephone 02476 322 259
Direct Line 02476 322 264

That's all...nothing else.

5
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 07, 2017, 05:02:39 PM »
Questions asked on UKAR......
What benefits ( if any ) do those who are 'Founding Guardians' get for their membership fee ?
Also, is the scheme which was introduced ( or going to be introduced ? ) for new 'Guardians' still going ?

6
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 06, 2017, 08:59:08 PM »
It's a shame that there's still nobody who'll come on here in an official ( or even semi-official ) capacity and address these concerns.

About the only person you see attempting to defend VTST & their policies is 'Microlightdriver' on UKAR.

7
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 05, 2017, 10:45:09 AM »
As I've posted on UKAR.....Unless things have changed, as far as I can work out :

1. Full-time staff should currently consist of :
Engineering Manager, Webstore Manager, Admin Manager, Remote Stock Sales Manager, Admin Manager at Doncaster, Facilities Manager.
Webstore assistant, Admin assistant, Remote Stock Sales Assistant, Admin Assistant at Doncaster.
( So 6 Managers & 4 Assistants )

2. I shudder to think.
The salary alone ( excluding pensions, consultants' fees, etc. ) was £750k when they had 22 staff.
Only one staff member ( Dr.P. ) was getting paid more than £60k
They've got roughly half the staff, so logically the wage bill reflects this.....theoretically, I'd guess it's now somewhere around £300-350k PA ( so around £25-£30k per month )

Anyone dispute the accuracy of this ?


8
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 04, 2017, 02:45:28 PM »
Quote
Isn’t one of the Trustees registered on here?
Yep...Steve Liddle ( 'SteveL' )

9
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 04, 2017, 12:56:57 PM »
Meh !!
I beat the pair of you - I stopped donating in 2013, albeit that mine were ad-hoc donations rather that subscriptions.
I was contacted....not by anyone from VTST, but from Sarah F. & Graham H. as I also binned my Club membership.

I've been contemplating bunging some money at XL388, but I wouldn't want to jinx the project -- the last 3 aviation projects I've donated to being Meteor WZ507 ( a couple of months before they sold it ) Shackleton WR963 ( a couple of months before they had their 'organisation problems' ) and the Sea Vixen ( a couple of months before they crashed it the last time )  :-[
So if anyone's got an aviation project they want to put the kibosh on, let us know !!  >:D

Oh, and speaking of XL388....
For those who don't frequent UKAR, the question's been raised on there -- for their ongoing restoration, have VTST given them any buckshee kit, or has anything they've had off VTST had to have been paid for ?

10
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 01, 2017, 08:37:53 PM »
2 Excel are in the process of setting up their own 145 Maintenance Organisation in the Hangar, which will hopefully be operational in January and need the space.

 ;D

Thanks for the confirmation & the explanation for the move.
Presumably it's not just a temporary measure, then.

11
Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 01, 2017, 03:37:54 AM »
Bit of a thread resurrection again......

A claim has been made on UKAR by someone calling themselves '911T' that the Swift has now joined XH558 & the Canberra basking in the glorious fresh air.
Not seen anything posted anywhere else claiming this, so is that correct ?
If so, why the apparent sudden decision by 2Excel Aviation ?

12
Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: October 28, 2017, 05:03:15 PM »
As some have commented on UKAR, though, if discussions took place with the airport's owners before the plans were submitted, why weren't these points raised at the time ?

13
Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: October 28, 2017, 03:06:56 PM »
I'm back agin !  ;D

For those of you out there who don't frequent the UKAR forum, you may be unaware that some objections to the plans have been made....by DSRHA's owners/operators !

As I posted on UKAR, these are the objections that I could find :
Quote
    This hangar does not penetrate the OLS surface at any point.
    It is in direct line of sight for radar which will require a detail technical assessment for the impact on line of sight.
    For construction a Crane authorisation Form (CAF) will be required prior to any works.
    Wind modelling may also be requires by to proximity of hangar to the runway threshold
    SPV installation will require modelling with panels ensuring no glare is experienced in line with FAA / ICAO requirements with the developer using a SGHAT tool specifically and reference its results as this was developed by the FAA and Sandia National Laboratories as a standard and approved methodology for assessing potential impacts on aviation interests.
    The airport will need certified signed documented testimonials, a safety case and / or risk assessment that the glare will be at safe levels and that the type of SPV panel to be used will have a reduced glare to minimise the risk to aircraft unlike other standard residential and commercial reflective surfaces for aircraft circling the ATZ or approaching from the north.



    1. A line of sight survey must be conducted with a review of the impacts on DSA primary radar, which must be submitted to the airport and evaluated prior to any construction taking place.
    2. Any high reach equipment over 10m in height above ground must be approved by the airport authority before its use. Forms can be found at http://dsa.aero/ops-information/useful- ... -documents
    3. Any SPV installed will require modelling with panels ensuring no glint or glare is experienced in line with FAA / ICAO requirements with the developer using a SGHAT tool specifically and references its results as this was developed by the FAA and Sandia National Laboratories as a standard and approved methodology for assessing potential impacts on aviation interests. The airport will need certified signed documented testimonials, a safety case and / or risk assessment that the glint or glare will be at safe levels and that the type of SPV panels to be used will have a reduced glint / glare to minimise the risk to aircraft unlike other standard residential and commercial reflective surfaces for aircraft circling the ATZ or approaching from the north.
    4. Detail to ensure that no part of the build will increase any wild life activities within the aerodrome boundary by ensuring the structure does not increase / encourage roosting or nesting.

14
Engineering / Re: How would you feel?
« on: September 18, 2017, 05:22:13 PM »
Nobody's saying it is....doesn't mean it can't be asked though, especially as there are people on here who can answer it.

15
Engineering / Re: How would you feel?
« on: September 18, 2017, 12:42:52 PM »
Following comments on UKAR about how non-standard XH558 is with regards all the kit which was stripped out & the fitment on modern avionics, a number of us have said we recall that the plan was to refit all the equipment ( and restore the cockpit to standard ) once it stopped flying.

Firstly, are we correct ?

Secondly, if we are correct, is there any reason why this hasn't been done or at last commenced ( or has it, but not publicised ? )


Edited to add.....
And speaking of UKAR -- Have you got your membership sorted yet, Jane ??

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 72