A Little VC10derness

Not a big suprise if it has but good news all the same

From http://www.airtattoo.com/airshow/aircra ... -countries

"Earlier this week, we received a very encouraging letter from Air Command detailing some of the aircraft the RAF hope to be able to send to the Air Tattoo next summer. They include a flying VC-10 transport aircraft and TriStar air-to-air tanker plus a C-17, A330 'Voyager' and C-130J/K Hercules for either the flying display or static park."

Great news, that's me booking my ticket for next year then

If you are going on the Saturday I will see you there.

In my line of work we are heavily regulated and our facility is on its "final" extension for its licence and is due to close in 2016. However the reaplacement isnt due to be finished until 2019.

I predict another extension will be granted, both for the VC10's and my work.

The VC10's out of service date has been put back until October 2013.

Great News

The Airbuses aren't up to it then!!!!!!!
vololiberista

Remarkable, isn't it. The writing has been on the wall for quite a few months now, (in fact, we were discussing it in the shed as far back as April last year), and we were told absolutely, quite definately, beyond any shadow of doubt we would not be required after March this year.

We had visitors from the DA, IPT and anyone else you care to mention concerned with the aircraft asking us about problems that we dealt with on a regular basis at depth servicing because they said they only needed to look at the frames for a short while at BZN.

We have all flown the coop and the extensions are being extended and the bridges are part blown behind them!

It is not a matter of "we told you so" but we told you so!!!!!

When will this country ever get it right?

We need a few ex-military men in the government.

Lucky Bruce Dickinson has a full set of VC10 staging at Saints

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond just confirmed the 6 months extension in a BBC Radio 4 interview. He also admitted that the A330 and A400M programmes have been a disaster so far. What a surprise ...

I'm surprised he even acknowledged that the 2 projects have been a disaster, the usual waffle blames the previous government, or claims that things have changed and such disasters won't happen again .

It's interesting to contrast the lead time of the VC10 conversion against the A330, VC10 trials in the late 70s, delivery commenced in 83ish, A330 trials to delivery ?, we don't know yet

The interview with SofS on this morning's Today programme was certainly the first time I've heard confirmation in the public domain of an extension to the VC 10's out-of-service date. I believe he mentioned October, but have not been able to get the scroll function on BBC iPlayer to move some 2.5 hours into this morning's recording to confirm that. I am equally fairly sure he did not call the A330 and A400M programmes 'a disaster' - indeed, I don't recall the latter being mentioned at all, as Sarah Montague's concern was almost exclusively on the future AAR programme, very probably prompted by an article in last weekend's Sunday Times. Mr Hammond did not deny the difficulties that have arisen over some many months now with the Voyager refuelling basket, to which he claimed there is now a solution. He also admitted that the ramp-up of aircraft into service had been slower than planned, but that a planned AAR service release would be achieved in 2014. We might, however, agree that the terminology here is a matter of semantics. For good or ill, the Voyager programme, provided under contract, is the future for AAR in the RAF, and those who might have a right to complain most loudly about its halting progress are the personnel of No 10 Squadron who, as so often in the RAF's history, have to do what they can with what they are given. And I rather suspect that in some 25 years or so, as the current Airtanker contract approaches its end, there may well be as many damp eyes at the Voyager's passing as there are now over the sad, but much-belated, demise of the VC 10.

There must be some serious red figures appearing on the fleet plan. When I last looked at it last March before we finished most of the frames were into negative extensions, (and the then plan had already been giggled to the right to accomodate depth servicing ending and frame swaps ie 109/808).

It is testament to how good the frames and the engineers on 101 are that they keep them flying. Keep up the good work.

ICM wrote:I am equally fairly sure he did not call the A330 and A400M programmes 'a disaster'. [...] We might, however, agree that the terminology here is a matter of semantics.

Of course he did not use the word disaster, that would be a first for a politician like him while in government But for a guy like Hammond, who usually downplays any problem as much as he can, today's statement came pretty close to that. Regarding the A400M, I think he mentioned "another Airbus project" worrying the MoD, but maybe I misheard.