WIX Archives

Re: Vulcan XH588

Posted by Mike on Tue Nov 19, 2002 03:07:45 PM

In reply top Re: Vulcan XH588 posted by Tony C on Mon Nov 18, 2002 07:08:05 AM


: As an idea to prevent this catastrophe from happening agai
: n, would it not be possible for the MOD to rename the BBMF
: (now looking for a fairly large rock to sit behind) to the
: "Historic Flight" and then keep one or two airframes of e
: ach type operated by the Forces.
:
: If an Historic Flight was operated by the MOD, the require
: d skills and engineering facilities and engineering requir
: ements would constantly be available, to keep such aircraf
: t, airworthy and flown at airshows.
:
: Just imagine, a display including the Lancaster, Shackleto
: n and Vulcan or alternatively a flight of the Hampden, Has
: tings and Victor.
:
: I understand that this would cost money and maybe support
: could be obtained from the private sector in a similar man
: or to that currently used by the private individuals/Compa
: nies as now.
:
: I appreciate that this idea is not perfect and waiting to
: be shot down but what do the rest of you think.
:
...Hmmmm

Before we all get too carried away with flights of fancy into cloud cuckoo land, here are the (somewhat harsh) facts of economic reality :

We have a unique organisation worldwide in the BBMF. This is funded by the taxpayer, and allows many millions of people throughout the UK, and Europe, each year, to see airworthy examples of WWII aircraft, crucial to our heritage. I repeat, such an organisation, govermnent funded, on this scale, is UNIQUE WORLDWIDE. I do not know what the cost of this amounts to each year, but it is certainly considerable. It has survived the ever-shrinking size of our armed forces, and currently amounts to : 1 Lancaster, FIVE Spitfires, 2 Hurricanes, and, in support, 2 Chipmunks and a Dakota. All fully airworthy, maintained in immaculate condition, with all necessary support facilities and manpower.

Whilst I'm sure your comments were well meant, the idea of increasing this organisation to the size that you suggest, in the ongoing climate where every penny of the defence budget needs to be spent on upgrading and replacing equipment to support out armed forces in the field (literally a matter of life or death as we are preparing to face possibly another Gulf War, as well as providing numerous peacekeeping forces worldwide) is distasteful to me.

We should be grateful for the continued existance of the BBMF in it's present form, as well as the RNHF and AACHF (albeit partially funded by private money nowadays) and not continually carp on about our loss of aviation heritage in this country.

Unfortunately, the whole Vulcan episode s one of a PRIVATELY OWNED aircraft (not a trust, or museum in public ownership), whose owners simply bit off more than they could chew. Without adequate funding in place to restore the aeroplane to airworthy status, let alone operate it, they embarked on what seems like a last-ditch attempt with the lottery application, knowing all along that it was a long shot, as it had been publically discussed that lottery money, as a matter of policy, would not be provided for airworthy aircraft (especially privately-owned ones).

Whilst I am sad to see the apparent failure of this worthy project (I can still remember the emotional afternoon at Cranfield some 10 years ago now at '558s last public display) and would dearly love to see her fly again, it seems to be the inevitable result of taking on a project of this size without the necessary resources in place.

Follow Ups: