heads up Guy Martin's Spitfire C4 7:30pm

[John K]

IMO, that is an experience that should not be made that "exclusive".........

I might even out rant Lyonspride on this (some chance)...

It is a total outrage that what ever government runs the country does not subsidise the continued flight of our magnificent aviation history.

It makes me fume that folk have to go cap in hand to keep (for example) XH558 in the sky. And as for £3k to fly in a Spitfire or Lightning...

If anybody wants to do it, that should immediately mark you as a proper patriot and the government should give you a full grant for it.

The amount we spend greasing the palms of third world dictators, sorry did I say that, of course I mean our magnificent foreign aid budget could, no SHOULD be spent on our mechanical history...

Grrr....

[s2rrr]

Wasn't this particular Spitfire privately owned and funded. Yes a national treasure like the B-o-B flight should be fully funded and the Mosquito and Vulcan and Concorde, to name but a few. Also shouldn't have sold off Rolls Roycs plus the many more heritage issues we have squandered, not forgetting North Seal Oil.

 

Bob

[John K]

... not forgetting North Seal Oil.

 Bob

Is that a bit like whaling..?

[jeff oakley]

I equally think we have a rich history which we have forgotten, however no matter how much money is raised the Vulcan will one day stop flying as the components are already past their normal life cycle. Spares are not available so it is a when not if it stops flying. concorde is even worse as they probably could get one or two flying but it is tied up in so much red tape and the cost would be insane 

 

In Comparison the WW11 planes are straight forward, can be rebuilt over and over again cheaply, in aviation term. The big but though is there are too few of us who want to preserve them and to many who would axe any spending on celebration war completely. 

[s2rrr]

Good spot John, Freudian slip, must get my eyes tested yet again and yes you could say a bit like whaling.

 

 

Bob

[Doug Dastardly]

At the end of the day how many people will actually put their hands in their pockets to preserve these things? I agree that the country should keep a core going but would these ever be available for paid rides?

 

I'm very glad some people stump up their hard earned and pay for the preservation of things like this, and if they have to charge extortionate rates for joyrides so be it. It's better than them rotting in scrapyards.

 

Worth checking out the gallery for those of us who won't be flying in it, wonderful photos.

[corsechris]

Anyone hear the man (Guy) on Radio 2 this morning?? I'd like some of what he's on please - he tends to speak fairly quickly on his TV stuff, but man was he on a roll this morning!!  Possibly related to him just about to have a go at beating the world speed record for 'go-cart/soapbox'.

 

Was lucky enough to get a free invite to Duxford last month and saw some fabulous old warbirds. Paid my £20 to have a good look round 'Sally B' and a more reasonalbe £5 to have a mooch in the Catalina 'Miss Pickup' as well. Was wonderful to see, hear & feel a Vulcan flying again.

 

The PBY was interesting, spoke to one of the owners and apparently they have a consortium of about 40 who each stump up about £17k I think he said for part-shares. Running costs are about £1k an hour for fuel IIRC. He said the last time they had an engine problem it cost about $1500 to have a new cylinder flown over from the US which didn't sound too bad all things considered.

 

Rich mans game though.

[tisme]

I had a good chat with the guide in the Vulcan at the Midlands Air Museum (Coventry Airfield)  http://www.midlandairmuseum.co.uk/index.php  and he said that the old "war birds" were comparatively simple to maintain as the technology was basically "sticks and wires" - the Vulcan however was one of the new breeds of "fly by wire" and the wiring looms consisted of thousands of wires running the full length of the aircraft (so a Westfield is pretty simple by comparison ) - and it's that complexity alone that makes keeping XH558 flying so difficult (of course the airframe was never meant to last this long either).

 

Fantastic sitting up in the cockpit - originally designed for just one person  - how those guys flew to the Falklands and back defies words....

 

But yes, it's a shame we have to rely on benefactors and public donations to keep these British icons alive - but then the state never did care much about cherishing our industrial heritage       

[Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman]

The area manager for one of our suppliers used to work on the Vulcans during his RAF days when they were still in service, (systems and avionics I seem to recall). He was convinced they'd never get and keep it flying, just because of the complexity and because of all the special tooling they'd had to make themselves over the years to do even relatively simple maintenance tasks on the electrical systems (especially for getting at the wiring etc in situ), that just wouldn't be available to the new team of supporters and engineers.

[Lyonspride]

.

 

But yes, it's a shame we have to rely on benefactors and public donations to keep these British icons alive - but then the state never did care much about cherishing our industrial heritage       

 

Heritage doesn't really have a place in a country where "new is always better" and consumerism is forced down our necks 24/7. My own parents have thrown away antiques worth (now) stupid amounts of money just to replace them with cheap plastic rubbish from Ikea and don't even get me started on the "let's get rid of all those old cars that we're not profiting from anymore" scrappage scheme.

[corsechris]

Finally got round to watching this last night and concur with what most have already said. It was a replica, not a restoration, and the way they kept banging on about it being Geoffrey Stephensons plane just devalued the program IMO. Modelled on it, yes, by all means. Interesting that the test pilot was having none of it - only referred to it as 'the best one the lads have built'. It would be interesting to have the pilot comment on how different it was from a genuine old warbird - I'd imagine one built during the war would be rather less carefully put together given the pressures they were under back then. Most of the planes from that era that haven't been rebuilt tend to look a bit rough around the edges.

 

It was a truly superb piece of work by all involved, wonderful to see it fly, would have been great to see more of the nuts & bolts and less of the 'drama'. 

 

I'd be amazed if a single component from the original made it onto the new one.

[peterg]

Finally got round to watching this last night and concur with what most have already said. It was a replica, not a restoration, and the way they kept banging on about it being Geoffrey Stephensons plane just devalued the program IMO. Modelled on it, yes, by all means. Interesting that the test pilot was having none of it - only referred to it as 'the best one the lads have built'. It would be interesting to have the pilot comment on how different it was from a genuine old warbird - I'd imagine one built during the war would be rather less carefully put together given the pressures they were under back then. Most of the planes from that era that haven't been rebuilt tend to look a bit rough around the edges.

 

It was a truly superb piece of work by all involved, wonderful to see it fly, would have been great to see more of the nuts & bolts and less of the 'drama'. 

 

I'd be amazed if a single component from the original made it onto the new one.

 

Just for clarity in the replica vs restoration argument, this is a post on Blatchat from Roger King who actually worked for the restoration company on this project:

 

"It WAS a rebuild of the original aircraft. If it was a replica it wouldn't be allowed to fly because it would be a new aeroplane and that wouldn't conform to current legislation. As a rebuild it basically only has to conform to the design and regulations current at the time of original build. Of course, it was a major rebuild - new fuselage, wings, tailplane, flying controls, different engine, new prop, etc.

 

Only a few original parts were usable and most of those didn't come from the same aircraft, but so long as you can show that you own the substantial part of the orignal aircraft you are allowed to "repair" it. Of course, there would be 2 tenths of b******* all difference between this rebuild and a new replica - but one can fly and the other can't (in this country). How people view this aircraft compared to an aircraft with a documented continuous history since the 1940's is of course up to them."

[corsechris]

Sounds very much like the bad old days of kit cars - slap a Jag chassis plate on a cobra rep and call it done.....  10/10 for getting around regulations though.

 

As his closing commment says, it is up to an individual how they view it...and I view it as a replica. A 100% faithfull, better than original, utterly brilliant replica. A £3m kit-plane with probably no parts from the orginal donor. Nice one!

[John K]

Finally watched this last night and really enjoyed it.

Best bit - well apart from the Ma Duce chewing up the Beemer - was the wing bolts being machined to such a tight tolerance that being heated to body temp over expanded them..!