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 - sickbag_andy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 43
Aviation Waffle / Re: Douglas C54 Skymaster at North Weald
« on: January 27, 2018, 04:58:51 PM »
nice to see you there today Sam (and Gregg - he can't wait to get his hands dirty!). Such an interesting project and I hope to get down to see you as and when I can, Allan gave us some background as to where you are with things and it looks promising.

good luck with it all

Aviation Waffle / Re: MH370 Search to restart
« on: January 09, 2018, 09:26:16 AM »
Needle in a haystack comes to mind.

A bit like trying to find out what the Trust have done with all our hard earned money :( mission impossible springs to mind !!!!


Maybe hire them to find out on a 'No find, No fee' basis as well ;D

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: December 24, 2017, 09:01:14 AM »
A question - do the Trust own the site of the proposed hangar or do Doncaster airport own it? and as a follow on from that is that planning permission owned by the site owner or the tenant?

If it's the owner, what's to stop them developing the hangar themselves rather than the Trust albeit funded by a knight in shining armour stuffed with wads of readies? Surely the airport will see that planning approval as a long term asset for expansion and if the Trust don't get their sponsor fairly quickly will the airport say ' you've had enough time and can't demonstrate any ability to build this hangar' and take the development on themselves with no offer to the Trust of medium term use?

Could it be that the airport supported this because they saw an opportunity to get planning approval where the sentimental appeal of the Vulcan being housed was a help in swaying the planners whereas it would have been more difficult without in the knowledge that at best after 10 years the Trust would vacate, the owner would be paying rent to the airport and bringing in business and at worst if the Trust fails then they have a site with approval for development that they can offer on the open market without the attached strings of the Trust, and of course that approval all gained at someone else's cost?

Thanks Clive, I obviously don't know the figures so can't help on that one.

I expect a lot of those who joined the first year were tempted by the various carrots that were dangled and a sense of loyalty, after all a large majority voted to allow the club to disband and together with it's assets/funds be integrated into the Trust's scheme. Equally I expect that some of them will not renew after the first year; some through apathy (not seeing anything much happen that interests them) or disillusionment (carrots fed to the cash cow - or donkey instead), the former is probably normal for any group of this kind where initial enthusiasm quickly wanes amongst a less interested portion of the membership. I'm sure there will be a significant drop in numbers after the first year though

That in itself is concerning as once the stock has all been auctioned off to meet the bills what will be left for the income stream? I suppose the stores will no longer be needed so they can stop renting that and then questions about the need for the staff that man it will undoubtedly come to the fore so some potential savings there but there doesn't appear to be any plan B to even maintain the income levels let alone increase it to sustain the rental of the hangar unless that elusive investor /sponsor comes along and despite the massive public appeal of 558 while she was flying that never materialised so with far less public exposure/appeal what are the chances of that sponsor suddenly appearing now? It's only likely if there's a substantial financial advantage in owning a hangar at Doncaster airport rather than desire to support the Vulcan in my opinion.

well looking at my summary at the start of this topic if the current and next years income matches 2016's £550k ish excluding legacies (who is likely to leave a legacy that is going to be frittered away on wages and a few overheads now?), even if the Trust has slashed the expenditure from the £850k of 2016 by 75% that would only leave around £300k surplus and that's assuming donations have stayed the same (I bet they have dropped).
So unless they get an investor at £300k a year that's going to take 10 years to get the £3 million to build this new interim hangar so surely they might as well wait and go straight to ETNA in 10 years time and save the money.

I really don't see how this hangar is going to happen at all I'm afraid, somebody please convince me I'm wrong.

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Funding the new hangar - how?
« on: December 22, 2017, 08:17:49 AM »
Permission has been GRANTED today for the hangar.

I think that was to be expected so does it change the situation much?

Will a site with planning permission be any more attractive to a prospective investor?  - possibly but also possibly a predatory one who foresees the Trust not having the funds for lease costs before very long and thus gains a complete hangar in a fairly short space of time.

and Richard Clarke in that statement quoted by Minty on October 12th said(re-quoting):
"Vulcan to the Sky Trust spokesman Richard Clarke said the scheme would not be able to move forwards until an investor was in place, and the trust was currently actively looking for that investor.

The trust is also currently raising funds from the public towards the costs.

He said: "We would like to think when planning permission comes forward we could move forward as soon as possible. That is the aspiration and we wanted to start the ball rolling by putting the planning application in..

"We would like to be looking at starting next year, but it is difficult to put a date on it.."

so nothing happens before
1: they find an investor, - that's apparently not proving easy so no movement on that front for now?

2:currently raising funds from the public towards costs - expect a massive campaign soon - 'we need your money NOW or 558 will be stuck outside for years' and an unstated aim 'more importantly we have salaries to pay'

3: planning permission is now granted so a bit like Brexit the clock is ticking. Planning approvals normally have a time limit before commencement of 5 years so maybe it would actually have been better to wait until they have an investor rather than watching the clock tick down and after 5 years with no investor the money spent on the application will be wasted.
They could of course turn the first sod (which sod would you prefer?) and claim it's started. Just imagine the PR opportunity there, great fanfare and sell tickets to come and watch that sod turning at £200 a time while the breeze wafts across the sewage works bringing that sweet smell of success with it while 558 coughs her guts up in the background! And afterwards leave it until the money materialises and the 'cum volare porcos' aerobatic team perform that inaugural display over the new hangar!

4: an aspiration but for 2018 to be realistic they should have had an investor on board by now, the planning (project planning that is), detailed design and contracts between trust and investor have to be finalised and then find a suitable contractor to build it, and I don't think this guy would be suitable:
so apart from having permission to build they really aren't that much further forward.

5: i.e.  the unstated 5: in the meantime they need to find an even more generous investor for ETNA and raise their own funds for that so how is that progressing, if at all?

I'm afraid I just can't be optomistic re 558 being under permanent fixed cover by January 1st 2019 and it's all a great shame, a case of not cutting one's coat according to one's cloth unfortunately.
So sad and may I suggest naive as well.

Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 08, 2017, 05:37:18 PM »

Found out how to access 'Founding Guardians'.
On the home page click 'Shop in Store'.
Click 'Shop Here'.
'Founding Guardians' is on the right side of 'clothing size guide'.
Very small lettering!

well I tried but couldn't find it but thanks for trying (I've actually tried 3 times!). I got as far as clothing eventually but it's not much more that a crappy copy of amazon nowadays. I did consider buying a beanie hat to put on 558's cockpit during the cold winter months but I doubt they could even deliver it now even if they had the right size although I couldn't find the size guide anyway.

thanks for taking the time to tell me though.

Also thanks to Clive for the other link, another that I would never have found (for more obvious reasons). Why on earth isn't there a search function or have I missed that as well. It's all a bit of a shambles and you have to wonder how they can sell anything with this fiasco?

Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 08, 2017, 07:31:39 AM »
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 ?

Clive, I've just had a look at the trusts site and cannot find anything about guardians schemes anywhere, not even on the how to help & donate pages. It doesn't help that there's no apparent search facility.

I know the founding guardians scheme was only for ex club members and the chance to transfer over has now gone but thought there might have been something there to tell them how to re-new and maybe acknowledge their part (via the club)in getting and keeping 558 in the air. The guardians scheme was for non ex-club members and thus the current membership scheme so I would have expected that to be fairly prominent but it all just seems to be about asking for donations and standing orders or tat from the shop

This might me better in a separate topic really  as it's going away from the original subject but lets see what surfaces first for now

Engineering / Re: So that's it then?
« on: December 01, 2017, 10:27:49 PM »
well at least the initials don't have to be changed: Vulcan To The Snow.

it is a great shame and can only hope (and it is only a hope I fear) that the hangar gets approved and they find a benefactor to pay for it.

I don't know what the outgoings are now but I do hope that the majority of the money raised by the names under the wing appeal has been put aside for good use to benefit the aircraft rather than all being wasted on needless wages. I really can't understand why they need all the remaining 'employees' who effectively are just backroom and admin staff rather than directly looking after the aircraft. Most if not all similar organisations get along well by using volunteers at all levels of their management structure but there again most aren't on operational airports, maybe that illustrates why Doncaster was only right whilst she was flying.

i'm very disillusioned by the whole debacle

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: November 11, 2017, 08:51:34 AM »
I visited the new Bristol Aerospace museum on Thursday, it's in 2 parts with most of the exhibits in the old WW.1 hangars and Concorde in a brand new purpose built building which is excellent - that would act as a good 'blueprint' for the Trust to follow. I posted pics of it here:

or if you're not logged in my pics are in this Flickr album:

It's got plenty of viewing space at both ground and higher level with static exhibitions as well but fairly 'functional' construction. The quoted price for the whole museum is £19 million but I can't find a cost for the new building element as a comparison.
For the Trust to produce something similar that will be the hardest part -funding it.

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: October 29, 2017, 09:06:57 AM »
Or on the other hand the Trust or their representative may have decided to submit without the investigations with the attitude thatit may or may not be of a concern to the airport andif not and the airport did not ask for them then they could have spent money on a report which was unnecessary.

Remember these are not objections as such, just requests for information or clarification where they (the airport) feel more info is needed. That really isnt that unusual in planning applications and is a way of avoiding unnecessary work

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: October 28, 2017, 05:14:47 PM »
as the airport is probably the no.1 key player then yes it would have been logical to hold discussions AND a competent consultant should be fully aware of these sorts of issues, they must be pretty standard for airport works.

re the interference with radar signals, that should have been an obvious one to check. when I was resident engineer on the new Southend sewage works in the late 1990s we had to sent radio signals between the Southend site and Rochford sewage works which was close to the approach and the line of signals was almost parallel to it so that was the first thing I raised with the designer, he was an in house guy and a sewage treatment rather than aviation works expert and wasn't aware of potential issues but I suppose it was only my interest in aviation made me aware of it but in this instance it's on an airport site so really should be looking at potential hazards to the site owner. I am surprised if it wasn't discussed up front (and as the airport have raised it now it seems it wasn't).

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Comments on the new hangar plans!
« on: October 28, 2017, 04:30:04 PM »
I did notice the comments on UKAR Clive.

I don't think any of these are show stoppers, it will probably end up with approval with the points raised listed as conditions to be met before construction commences, that is quite common. I has a similar situation a several years ago when I designed a golf course, it was passed on appeal but with various conditions placed on the approval all that had to be met to the satisfaction of the authority before construction could commence.

the bigger impact will more likely be on cost - all the investigation will cost money, some of it is specialist work so the provider is in an advantageous situation and any changes to the design are likely to push the cost up. What effect that will have on any sponsor for the construction I don't know but it may commit them to a higher budget than they expected. The cost of the investigations and reports etc may need to be borne by the Trust - bang goes some of the name plaque scheme monies earlier than expected!

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Funding the new hangar - how?
« on: October 14, 2017, 07:38:52 AM »
Surely the money they have aquired thro the latest Names under the wing scheme will go towards the new Hangar??!!! ::) ::)

Wouldn't have thought so unless its for planning or lease costs. If the hangar is to be leased from an investor the would be no point in contributing to the construction costs

Ways To Raise Funding / Re: Funding the new hangar - how?
« on: September 25, 2017, 07:59:14 AM »
It reads like another 'Jam Tomorrow' spiel, or more specifically Jam in 2018 as long as you give us a barrowload of cash now.

As far as moving XH558 if this was a better option, is there a low loader out there with the capability of carrying the Vulcan whole?
(Bridges & flyovers aside!)

more like Jam in 2019 really when you look at the total timescale.

I don't think anything could move her whole - too heavy for the airlander and that's about all that could cope with the wingspan. That's why I feel we might have to resign ourselves to her being static only in the medium term if the hangar doesn't happen.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 43