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 - PaulH2015

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
31
Engineering / Re: Extraordinary General Meeting Needed?
« on: January 21, 2017, 01:55:03 PM »
You can moan all you like if it makes you feel better, but like all the bitching about ending her flying life it won't make one jot of difference.

They give arguments as to why Doncaster was chosen including "mainly related to the need to have a top-quality runway with emergency support so we can taxi XH558 regularly for her supporters."

XM655 does regular fast taxying at an airfield with minimal facilities and living out of doors.  Doncaster has significant disadvantages such as being booted out of house and home when commercial pressures take precedence as we have seen, probably very strict controls and potential penalties for fast taxying - imagine if there were a major problem on the runway and it couldn't immediately be moved.  But most importantly with the public road immediately adjacent to the full length of the runway and with far better views than anywhere the public are likely to be allowed inside the airport perimeter, just how many paying customers are they going to get?  They may well be regretting that decision, but I doubt they would admit it, and unless a one-off flight can be authorised (even assuming alternative proper accommodation can be arranged) they - and we! - are stuck with it.

They also mention needing somewhere to fly the Canberra from - eventually - but I can't see that needs a full commercial airport either.

"We always, always, check the intakes..."

That's just cruel ...  ::)

32
Engineering / Re: hanger move
« on: January 21, 2017, 01:48:26 PM »
If you read the information it only talks about 'donations', not pledges.

They give arguments as to why Doncaster was chosen including "mainly related to the need to have a top-quality runway with emergency support so we can taxi XH558 regularly for her supporters."

XM655 does regular fast taxying at an airfield with minimal facilities and living out of doors.  Doncaster has significant disadvantages such as being booted out of house and home when commercial pressures take precedence as we have seen, probably very strict controls and potential penalties for fast taxying - imagine if there were a major problem on the runway and it couldn't immediately be moved.  But most importantly with the public road immediately adjacent to the full length of the runway and with far better views than anywhere the public are likely to be allowed inside the airport perimeter, just how many paying customers are they going to get?  They may well be regretting that decision, but I doubt they would admit it, and unless a one-off flight can be authorised (even assuming alternative proper accommodation can be arranged) they - and we! - are stuck with it.

They also mention needing somewhere to fly the Canberra from - eventually - but I can't see that needs a full commercial airport either.

33
Engineering / Re: hanger move
« on: January 21, 2017, 09:19:51 AM »
Some Q&A here for those that haven't seen it http://www.vulcantothesky.org/faq-contact/survival-q-a.html

Still curiously vague as to where they will be: 'inside in a dry environment'.

On the question of cost of new hanger(s) "The developers are paying for the development on land already identified by the airport. Vulcan to the Sky Trust will be leasing it from the developers so we will not need to invest any supporters’ money in the building or the infrastructure."  But no indication as to whether this relates to the interim or ETNA hanger.

Of note is that 24% of the first £100,000 was raised in 24 hours.

34
Engineering / Re: hanger move
« on: January 19, 2017, 09:06:05 AM »
What's more concerning is this mornings newsletter.  £200k needing to be raised over two months just to put her into storage and 'to survive' seems a huge amount to basically tow her and her bits and pieces from one hanger to another.  Are there debts that need paying off?

I'm also wondering just what the 'temporary storage facility' actually comprises.  It says 'A hangar is essential for protecting XH558 from the weather and providing an environment for maintenance to RAF standards.' and 'At the end of January, she will be towed out and placed under cover in storage' without saying just what that under cover storage actually comprises.  The word 'hanger' only seems to be applied to the present home, and a yet-to-be-built interim hanger.

The letter mentions the £200k includes 'costs associated with finalising plans for the new, purpose-built hangar' - is that the interim hanger?  Or the ETNA hanger?  What are the likely costs of building the interim hanger?  If the tours and events are to cease until the interim hanger is up and running will that hanger have to be funded totally through donations?

35
Engineering / Re: New aircraft for the trust
« on: January 13, 2017, 11:35:31 AM »
It was a while ago, tricky to track it down again.  Seems odd to have removed all references before the new site was published though.

36
Engineering / Re: New aircraft for the trust
« on: January 06, 2017, 02:56:14 PM »
What's the progress with WK163?the Trust seemed to have dropped all communication about her since she's been moved out

Moved out?

My daughter has seen somewhere that the Trust have dropped the share certificates for WK163, and people who have bought them are moaning and want their money back.  I can't find any reference to that, but then I can't find any reference to them at all, and it took some effort to find links to any WK163 page.

37
Aviation Waffle / Re: Wellesbourne and XM655
« on: December 13, 2016, 11:23:44 AM »
Hopefully enough to secure its future.  If you haven't visited 655, I recommend you do, even if it would mean a significant journey.  On Saturdays (maybe less so in the depths of winter) there are volunteers on site who will take you round including into the crew area, and if you are reaaally lucky well-behaved children may get to sit up front.

38
Engineering / Re: Engineering insights
« on: November 16, 2016, 11:11:51 AM »
Sad to hear, I spent most of a day with Ray earlier this year as a Vulcan Assistant, a great experience.

39
Engineering / Re: New aircraft for the trust
« on: October 29, 2016, 11:20:14 AM »
Similar sentiments here, although I can't agree with the 'sour taste' of the final flight, it was always blindingly obvious that to publicise it would have caused mayhem around Doncaster airport.

My wife was passionate about 558, but even having seen a Canberra fly she just wasn't interested, and several times has said they would do better to get another Lancaster back in the air.  I could see the attraction of WK163 from its historic perspective and it being a 2-seater, but support to achieve the same as for 558 was really never really going to happen.

The third video in the email newsletter is mainly an edit of the final year of flying and glorious, the final of the trial fast taxy (taxi if you wish) just emphasises what we have lost.  There may well be more interest when she does public fast taxys next year, but unless they block off 'Dogger's Lane' I can't see them making much money out of it.  The mound gives a far better view than any viewing point on the airfield will, and all future public events are really only likely to attract useful numbers of people from a relatively small geographical area.

And speaking of 'finals', with the fall-out from Shoreham will we even see a Vampire, Venom and Sea Vixen fly together again?

40
Engineering / Re: New aircraft for the trust
« on: October 24, 2016, 08:31:40 AM »
Shares closed at the beginning of this month.  Since then the focus has been on the last flights of XH558, which seems fair enough.

41
Aviation Waffle / Re: Sad news from Shackleton WR963
« on: October 06, 2016, 09:08:40 AM »

42
Aviation Waffle / Re: Red Arrows 'safety'
« on: September 13, 2016, 03:35:40 PM »
Bear in mind that many of their performances are over airfields or the sea, with the former having their own exclusion zones, and the width of the red zone only represents about 600m.  They will cover a far bigger area than that in total.  I wonder what happened for Goodwood.

43
I doubt the aeroplane has had as much impact on life of the general population as the coming of the railways did, as depicted in the recent BBC series 'The age of steam'.  For the first time there was standardisation, goods could be moved all over the UK and abroad, and villages and towns could specialise rather than every location having to be self-sufficient for all their needs.  As far as man never moving more than 30 miles from home it's more likely the railways ended that than the wheel, very few people 'travelled' before then.

44
Aviation Waffle / Re: Sad news from Shackleton WR963
« on: August 31, 2016, 02:52:34 PM »
That's awful, it seems the classic aircraft world is collapsing in a heap for more than one reason.  I was at Coventry for the Vulcan event and it was a great thrill to have all the engines thundering away so close to the fence.

On a slightly brighter note, Little Gransden was a good day on Sunday, despite the no-show of the Lancaster (sick - again).  But we had the Sally B who gave an excellent display, as did the Spitfire and Hurricane, classic jets were represented by a Gnat, plus many other displays.  On a sadder note the superb formation aerobatic display by the piloted Extra 300 (I think) and a 40% model was marred when the model caught fire, broke up and came down in flames.  Landed on the grass strip but fortunately clear of parked aircraft.   One lady spectator burst into tears saying "Oh, the poor pilot will never survive that ...".

45
Aviation Waffle / Re: Vulcan documentary
« on: August 21, 2016, 03:34:55 PM »
Missed it again - wrong time, not on Virgin and can't record Freeview.  Oh well, I imagine it will be on yet again sometime.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10