Of interest.

[Sad Sam3]

Just thought you might like to read this. Bottom line is while there are people who are unhappy with the way the 558 is being run, the CAA are so happy they even want the rest of the historic world to follow our lead.

http://key.aero/view_feature.asp?ID=35& ... on=airshow

[Gully]

I know that's been posted on here before, but I'm blowed if I can find it! It was on IA before the VTTST forum.

Best thing about the article IMO, is that it does clarify the Trust's role in the Waddington debarcle. However, the CAA stating that they are happy with the way in which '558 is operated does not endorse the Trust's management efficiency and cost control that (along with Education - not generally of interest to the CAA) are at the heart of many people's gripes about the current Trust.

However, credit where it's due - the aircraft operating procedures and process for restoration are benchmarks.

Gully

[Xplumberlives]

I know that's been posted on here before, but I'm blowed if I can find it! It was on IA before the VTTST forum.

Best thing about the article IMO, is that it does clarify the Trust's role in the Waddington debarcle. However, the CAA stating that they are happy with the way in which '558 is operated does not endorse the Trust's management efficiency and cost control that (along with Education - not generally of interest to the CAA) are at the heart of many people's gripes about the current Trust.

However, credit where it's due - the aircraft operating procedures and process for restoration are benchmarks.

Gully

Nicely put in to perspective Gully!

[Sooty655]

It would be wrong to say the Vulcan to the Sky Trust was trying to get it airborne come what may. In fact, they were fully on board with saying they couldn’t proceed. They behaved impeccably, and just what you would hope for an organisation that’s in charge of such a fabulous symbol.

Behind the scenes engineering tests were being done, analysis was ongoing, and there comes a point where either those are all in place to allow you to continue, or there are doubts; and where there are doubts, and they’re about issues that are significant from a safety point of view, you don’t want to commit to something that you don’t feel confident about, and that was certainly the case here.

Maybe I read things differently to other posters, but to me this says that the Trust knew they couldn't fly the displays when they sent 558 to Waddo, because they knew they hadn't done (or ensured others had done) the work necessary for the PtF renewal. That work had been specified years before and was to the Trust a well known requirement.

The only good thing the Trust did was to not attempt to force the CAA to issue the permit. This means that the CAA have no complaint, but it doesn't mean that no-one else has any reason to complain.

Maybe I would see it differently if some of the more positive posters would lend me their rose coloured specs.

[Saracenman]

indeed - i read it differently to most too!

the fact that the PtoF extension (remember, it was NOT a renewal ) was ultimately sorted out in a matter of a few hours, as the CAA clearly state. so why then was it not sorted out in a matter of a few hours, but TWO WEEKS BEFORE???

I knew of the issue two weeks before VTST 'claim' they knew............

SadSam3 - it's a great shame that you, and DB in the past, seem to confuse our annoyance with your BOSSES, with our feelings about you chaps.

the aircrew are experienced professionals, the groundcrew are experienced professionals - but the management?

sm

[Xplumberlives]

It would be wrong to say the Vulcan to the Sky Trust was trying to get it airborne come what may. In fact, they were fully on board with saying they couldn’t proceed. They behaved impeccably, and just what you would hope for an organisation that’s in charge of such a fabulous symbol.

Behind the scenes engineering tests were being done, analysis was ongoing, and there comes a point where either those are all in place to allow you to continue, or there are doubts; and where there are doubts, and they’re about issues that are significant from a safety point of view, you don’t want to commit to something that you don’t feel confident about, and that was certainly the case here.

Maybe I read things differently to other posters, but to me this says that the Trust knew they couldn't fly the displays when they sent 558 to Waddo, because they knew they hadn't done (or ensured others had done) the work necessary for the PtF renewal. That work had been specified years before and was to the Trust a well known requirement.

The only good thing the Trust did was to not attempt to force the CAA to issue the permit. This means that the CAA have no complaint, but it doesn't mean that no-one else has any reason to complain.

Maybe I would see it differently if some of the more positive posters would lend me their rose coloured specs.

[Sooty655]

SadSam3 - it's a great shame that you, and DB in the past, seem to confuse our annoyance with your BOSSES, with our feelings about you chaps.

the aircrew are experienced professionals, the groundcrew are experienced professionals - but the management?

sm

I'll second that!

[Gully]

Does anyone on IA have rose-tinted spectacles?!

Gully

[Xplumberlives]

Does anyone on IA have rose-tinted spectacles?!

Gully

I threw mine away years ago!

[Gully]

I've got some with one red lens and one green, but I think they're different as I fall over quite a bit when I wear them!

Gully

[Xplumberlives]

I've got some with one red lens and one green, but I think they're different as I fall over quite a bit when I wear them!

Gully

That might be because of the beer you're drinking at the same time!

[Saracenman]

stop press - Gully spends his spare time dressing as traffic lights!

before falling over

sm

[RLN]

[Gully]

Can't be a traffic light - never go near that Amber 'Nectar': hideous fizzy cold stuff!

Beer's supposed to be brown, unchilled, flat and issued from a hand pump!!

Gully

[Saracenman]

or simply delivered by a female

sm

[Flipflopman]

Back on topic....

Already done to death last month, Sam. And by people who can actually read an article for what it ACTUALLY says, rather than the select few sentences they choose to use for theirselves....

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/284250-vulcan-xh-558-threads-merged-143.html

Happy reading.....


Flipflopman

[Dan4th]

Thanks, Ron, that's one Hell of a Soapbox on there.....

The biggest single point I receive from all of this
is that the One Thing which the Waddington Incident
should have lead to -- i.e. CHANGE -- has still not
happened six months later.

If 558 Does fly in 2010, which we all want desperately,
it will be Despite the Trust Management, not because
of it.

And Sam, we idolize all you hands-on guys who do the
hard work that keeps her flying.

Period.

Dan4th

[Xplumberlives]

Back on topic....

Already done to death last month, Sam. And by people who can actually read an article for what it ACTUALLY says, rather than the select few sentences they choose to use for theirselves....

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/284250-vulcan-xh-558-threads-merged-143.html

Happy reading.....


Flipflopman

Thanks for your considered input!

[Ducati Boy]

SadSam3 - it's a great shame that you, and DB in the past, seem to confuse our annoyance with your BOSSES, with our feelings about you chaps.

the aircrew are experienced professionals, the groundcrew are experienced professionals - but the management?

sm

Steady on SM Some of that sounds vaguely like praise!

However, I have never been confused myself and always go for the jugular when defending the actual engineers(those with unimpeachable qualifications anyway). But some folk posting here and elswhere, lack the necessary control over the English language to make a clear and simple statement of exactly who they consider at fault. Whenever that clarity is present, you will hear no defence of the indefenceable from me.

Back on topic....

Already done to death last month, Sam. And by people who can actually read an article for what it ACTUALLY says, rather than the select few sentences they choose to use for theirselves....

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/284250-vulcan-xh-558-threads-merged-143.html

Happy reading.....


Flipflopman

Had to read it all again Ron, just to be sure I had read those articles for what they ACTUALLY said. I thought the CAA said it all pretty clearly. Individuals must make their own decision as to where they lay blame of course. Can't say I saw any evidence on Prune of a "super elite" of literary geniuses in evidence though? Basically, it was still the same mixture of misinformed, self appointed experts, axe grinders and conspiracy theoristsits its always been. There is plenty of "selective" sentence quoting in evidence over there too and some just use their own opinions as "pukka gen" and hang the evidence. At least the Moderator had a calming input, although he got the same reaction from the dedicated, fundamentalist, super-antis.

I think I prefer the more measured response over on IA, where we try to avoid personnel aggression. Unless you happen to have a Suzuki Bandit, like tanks, have a low centre of gravity and a ginger knapper. Happy New Year to all

[Jigsaw]

[Amanda_h]

Hi,

When I see all the messages about this subject, I often wonder what my late friend
Lynne Braithwaite would have made of it all.

[Xplumberlives]

Good old Lynne!

[Ducati Boy]

Hi,

When I see all the messages about this subject, I often wonder what my late friend
Lynne Braithwaite would have made of it all.

Probably would have done what us engineers always do when all the hot air is spent, leave the gas bagging to the political power seekers and get on with doing the best job we possibly can to keep our aircraft aloft.

[Flipflopman]

Had to read it all again Ron, just to be sure I had read those articles for what they ACTUALLY said. I thought the CAA said it all pretty clearly. Individuals must make their own decision as to where they lay blame of course. Can't say I saw any evidence on Prune of a "super elite" of literary geniuses in evidence though? Basically, it was still the same mixture of misinformed, self appointed experts, axe grinders and conspiracy theoristsits its always been. There is plenty of "selective" sentence quoting in evidence over there too and some just use their own opinions as "pukka gen" and hang the evidence. At least the Moderator had a calming input, although he got the same reaction from the dedicated, fundamentalist, super-antis.

Indeed, Pat. Trouble is, with this being as much of an emotive topic as it is, I think that there will always be an element of self appointed experts, axe grinders, conspiracy theorists and indeed rose tinted spectacle wearing optimists. As you may have read in my posts over on Pprune, my intention was to add a little balance to the argument, and that in reality Mr Kelleher by no means praised TVOC as a shining beacon of vintage aircraft operation, and also in no way directly blamed TVOC or any other outfit for the no show at Waddington, however, for those who wish to look, all of the evidence is there and clear to see, but as you correctly say, it is up to the individual to form their own conclusions. In the cliched words of Arthur C Clarke, "I give you the evidence, you make up your own mind" As regards the super elite of literary geniuses (or genii ) being absent from Pprune I agree entirely, however, there are also many there with an objective opinion, who, unlike ourselves have no emotional ties to the subject.

I think one thing is clear in all of this, and that is that in no way do the engineers come out of this with egg on their face, and I hope that in no way this is construed as such. As the project's "Insty" and busy at the time constructing the new instrument panels, you may not be aware of the fact that with my "Structures" hat on, I was charged with surveying the aircraft with a view to us carrying out the structural sampling, and quickly came to the conclusion that to carry out the work on 558 would be costly, and a massively retrograde step in the progress we had made at the time, thus leading to the talks between MA, TVOC, BAE and the CAA. I was also therefore to be directly involved with the trip to 603 to carry out the subsequent work. As you know yourself, this trip was mooted several times, but ultimately never happened. Anyhow, Pat, I appreciate fully your slant on matters, and hope that I'm not coming across as being critical of the engineering staff, in the same way that I'm hoping that your comments about people using simple opinion as "Pukka Gen" are not aimed at me.

Aside from all this, I hope you and the Dukes are well, and sincerely wish you all the very best for the New Year,


Flipflopman

[PhantomAviator]

Flipflopman said
'you may not be aware of the fact that with my "Structures" hat on, I was charged with surveying the aircraft with a view to us carrying out the structural sampling, and quickly came to the conclusion that to carry out the work on 558 would be costly, and a massively retrograde step in the progress we had made at the time, thus leading to the talks between MA, TVOC, BAE and the CAA. I was also therefore to be directly involved with the trip to 603 to carry out the subsequent work. As you know yourself, this trip was mooted several times, but ultimately never happened.'


Ron,
you do like jogging the old memory ,
I seem to remember of when visits were authorized to 603, they were suddenly over-ridden from the purpose of the visit to become a full blown parts retrieval visit.

I will not name names on here as to who made them changes or who rubber stamped the change of purpose, (they know who they are and if members of this forum then they can defend themselves).

I sat in on many meetings where one thing was decided, it was entered and agreed fully only for someone to change it to something else.

Needless to say that the issue that arose when it did, (IMO), should never have been side-stepped in the way they side-stepped it.


Happy New Year to All.