http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7351628.stm This prob wont mean much to many on here but after 13 years the "Vulcan to the sky's" group finally got an Avro Vulcan flying again. This baby was the last of Britans V bombers and in the flesh is a hugely imposing aircraft. For some reason the Vulcan is popular with the public. Oh and I used to work where this baby was born. ;-)
That's great - I hope they can raise enough money to keep it flying. There was always something unique about the UK's V-bombers & the Vulcans were always a sight to see (and hear).
But, that's akin to having some super rare console & locking it away in a glass case, never to be turned on! It actually makes sense to 'run' preserved stuff, as it tends to deteriorate with inactivity & you gradually lose the skills/expertise to work on them. Equally, I'd be happy if Concorde was ever to take to the skies once more, as I never got a chance to fly on it. Incidentally, one of the Vulcan airframes was used to test the Olympus jet engine later used on the Concorde.
Glad to see some places still care about their aviation history. The DoD is currently shredding its old F-14's because they're paranoid of parts finding their way to Iran. Still I find it odd that the MoD didn't keep at least one example in flying condition.
I am going to be very unpopular, but personally I would ban all unnecessary flights, fly pasts and 'fun days'. I'll no doubt be alone on that one, but hey! It's not just the 'aviation history', there seems to be a hellishly unhealthy fixation with anything that guzzles fuel and is inefficient by comparison to modern standards. When the last classic car engines clanks to a final stop and people realise what they have wasted, I'll be all the happier. Not so long ago the guy responsible for the Vulcan project was interviewed on the radio and he spluttered & coughed over the question of the cost of keeping the damned thing airborn. He also totally ignored the question about the pollution (noise & fuel) when it was put to him, but he did sheepishly admit that the Vulcan wouldn't be flying that often. Thank God! <Letters of complaint can be addressed to the ear that isn't listening caused by years of being on the flight path of military aircraft!> lol
Well, it grieves me that war veterans and current military personnel who are injured, mamed or the the widows of those left behind are struggling to eek out a standard or living because our Government have turned their back on them, yet people seem more than happy to fork out for cold steel & nostalgia. Did you see the funeral cortege in Canada compared to the same thing in the UK? There was an image on the front cover of one of the tabloid papers yesterday, which really kind of reflects how the Government is washing it's hands of the current conflicts. In Canada the funeral cortege is escorted by police, traffic is diverted and people are seen lining the streets and respecting those who have died for their country. Switch to the UK and the funeral cortege was held up in a traffic jam. Instead of us funding the past, we should be equipping the current troops. Said my piece. :nod:
I'm not going to disagree that these things aren't exactly the epitome of fuel efficiency, but you'd probably be better off trying to roll back on the expansion of civil aviation miles being travelled. I'm all for doing meetings & stuff by video-link... but on the other hand, I'd still like to see more of the world in person & ocean liners, whilst romantic, take too long & aren't really around anymore. BTW, those Vulcan test flights apparently cost £150,000 & doing the airshow season would be in the order of £1M a year. Essential spending? Hell no, but I think my childhood would have been the poorer for not seeing something like the Battle of Britain flight in action - it was one of the things that sparked my interest in the past/history, probably much more so than a mere static exhibit would have been able to achieve.
Funnily enough (whilst we are on the subject) there is a notion that being on the ocean wave is more ecologically sound. In actual fact the fuels used are low grade, unclean and are a major cause for concern. So much so that a French company has developed a huge sail which can be retro fitted to all sorts of ships. A fantastic idea. It apparently cuts fuel consumption & costs by huge amounts. Anyway, I can appreciate the importance of history. My brother is after all an historian and he would argue on your side that static displays never achieve the same level of enthusiasm in children or adults. History is brought too life when the subject is illuminated. However, in a multi media age it isn't so difficult. Instead of just having static displays you can use recordings, video footage, computer animation and a whole plethora of tricks to engage anyone's interest. I remember going to York to see the Railway Exhibitions. We topped the day off with a steam train journey to Scarborough. On the way (it was a beautiful summer) the smoke belched, and sparks flew. Apparently on the news one of those sparks set fire to the sheds in someones garden. It brought the whole steam experience to life, but I think it perfectly demonstrated the real reason that steam was superceeded by diesel and electric. As with aircraft, classic cars & rail the word 'romance' keeps being mentioned. Well, I think we need to move to 'practical'.
Again, I don't neccesarily disagree with you, but one thing that makes humans human, is their sense of notions such as romance & nostalgia - I'd never want to lose that, personally. Also, having tried to explain why I'd desire to possess a roomful of weird & wonderful electronics (such as gaming consoles) to normal folks, it's possible that my sense of practical is terminally flawed! For our own sakes we have to be conscious of the costs of our actions & I try to do my bit (recycle, reuse, walk {people think I'm nuts here because I prefer to walk/use public transit, rather than drive}) - but I wouldn't want to entirely give up on some of my less practical activities. I was reading a while ago about that giant sail idea - that's great!
I think the problem with the UK, and I say this as an Englishman born and bred, is that we do not spend enough on entertainment, development, infrastructure, and things "just for the hell of it". We never do anything without a reason any more. We can't relax and enjoy ourselves (unless alcohol is involved). Consequently we are a down-trodden and aimless nation that has become a mere shadow of its former self. We are always happy to make-do, to survive and continue, no longer to push the envelope, take chances or exert ourselves. Case in point: chav culture, degrading schools, political correctness gone mad, overly liberal standpoints in every important area that we need to stand firm in, large job losses to other countries, and ultimately loss of respect in world politics and opinion in general. It's frustrating and it saddens me. However, I think keeping history alive just because it is history, remembering the past and doing things for the simple fact that we can, are positive things and things that should be encouraged. We should look back at what once made us great and learn from it. We need more stuff like this. We are far too practical, we are far to uptight and we are far too ready to toe the line. A few flights of this great lumbering beast of machinery is not going to affect the climate to any real extent, nor is it going help protect us from the cold war, as it once did. But it might inspire someone and it might remind us of times when we used our brilliant inventors, designers and engineering before it all went to China and India, before it was bought up by the US and spun off for some extra dollars in a billion dollar account in NY, and before the budget for such endeavours was taken away to pay for a bunch of lay abouts, benefit scroungers and foreigners.
Haha. Perhaps I sound like some old bugger conservative with the grey moustache and green landrover :lol: I sound more like my grandfather every day - which as a younger man I would have been disgusted at. But moving away from England makes you see a lot of things differently
£6,000,000 it cost to put that back in the air, while the same East Anglia is having to flood 6 coastal villages because it can't afford £6mil in new sea defences. But hey, at least they have an obsolete nuclear bomber to help with the evacuation.
I agree with you that is largely a waste. But that is what we do isn't it? We take advantage of our option to be wasteful. And eventually all this waste will come back to bite some of us in the ass. Whenever I see the radar screen of the US and all the planes in the air I am disgusted. There are far too many planes flying around. There are also far too many cars driving around. Which also leads to there are far to many human beings breathing. You know no one ever seems to talk about this, but there has got to be a limit on the amount of humans the Earth can support. There are only so many resources. I suppose people may start to realize this now that China and India are starting to put a drain on the world's resources.
The money comes from donations though, doesn't it? Out of the pockets of the general public. Sea defences are the responsibility of the government. The UK population pays enough in taxes and is financially bouyant enough as a nation to afford 6million on protecting the people from the sea. No doubt the luxuries you have in the home would feed a fair few starving people, but you're not going to sell up to do that are you? Same thing, basically.
The Governments attitude toward flood plains, flood defenses and sea walling is legendary! On one hand local councils are being allowed to 'develop' low level areas considered by environmentalists, ecologists and most sane thinking people as 'flood plains'. These local councils grant permission for development, the houses & businesses get built and when a flood occurs the official line is 'We didn't see that coming!' Now the insurance companies are taking the lead and threatening to pull the plug (pardon the pun) on protecting properties in flood plain areas. A lot of properties recently flooded in the likes of Hull and Midlands have seen their resell value drop. Many are having to fork out because the Government has failed to assist in resolving the redevelopment issues. The main reason being there are far too many people want to live in the South East of England. It is being over developed and resource stripped. People are being allowed to build on wholly inappropriate land and the consequences are not being carried through. Whenever I look at a property, I get a local map showing contours, establish whether the property is above local water levels or close to streams, rivers etc. It's no guarantee, but if you live by a river or the sea... Joined up thinking? The Environmental Protection agencies & those responsible for protecting waterways are only responsible for certain stretches of rivers, streams and banks. The council are responsible for others, local farmers and land owners for yet more and other agencies such as council road departments are responsible for pathways & footbridges... the list continues. Sea defences are again equally complicated and a lot of people are arguing that in most instances it is not worth throwing millions of pounds at saving land, which will ultimately be lost. Even in areas where they have installed sea & flood defences, the silly buggers are surprised when the water (which has to go somewhere) ends up damaging some other river system, town centre, beach front etc. The British Government has lost the ability to think big, join the dots and see an overall picture. The words 'Cause & Effect' seems to be lacking in their dictionary.
