Concorde

[Nick Greg]

I was fortunate to go from New York to London on it many years back. Those were the days when you could have a fag on board! Very small though. I wasn't paying by the way!

[roverbarmy]

Originally Posted by dattrike

Was that the cockpit at the jet age museum at Staverton (now cotswold) airport. Very cramped to get up in it.

It was the Vulcan at Norwich Aviation Museum.


Link

[baxlin]

Pity about the Wellesbourne Vulcan, according to the crew chief who showed a few of us round a couple of years ago.

He said the airframe had done significantly fewer hours than the more famous XH558, and would have 'lasted longer', so was a contender for preservation/returning to the skies. It seems it was never, or only briefly, in regular squadron service.

The problem was the engines. XH558 had an earlier series of engine (200?), of which there were many available, whereas the Wellesbourne aircraft had a later version (300?), but there were very few of these. And as the two were not interchangeable, XH558 it was.

As I said, anecdotally. I’m happy to be corrected of course!

[planenut]

Originally Posted by baxlin

Pity about the Wellesbourne Vulcan, according to the crew chief who showed a few of us round a couple of years ago.

He said the airframe had done significantly fewer hours than the more famous XH558, and would have 'lasted longer', so was a contender for preservation/returning to the skies. It seems it was never, or only briefly, in regular squadron service.

The problem was the engines. XH558 had an earlier series of engine (200?), of which there were many available, whereas the Wellesbourne aircraft had a later version (300?), but there were very few of these. And as the two were not interchangeable, XH558 it was.

As I said, anecdotally. I’m happy to be corrected of course!

Correct, and XM655 was used for the training of crews for XH558.
(great cafe on the airfield)

[Nobby]

Originally Posted by baxlin

Pity about the Wellesbourne Vulcan, according to the crew chief who showed a few of us round a couple of years ago.

He said the airframe had done significantly fewer hours than the more famous XH558, and would have 'lasted longer', so was a contender for preservation/returning to the skies. It seems it was never, or only briefly, in regular squadron service.

The problem was the engines. XH558 had an earlier series of engine (200?), of which there were many available, whereas the Wellesbourne aircraft had a later version (300?), but there were very few of these. And as the two were not interchangeable, XH558 it was.

As I said, anecdotally. I’m happy to be corrected of course!

Actually, 655 was issued to 9 sqn in 1964 at Cottesmore and 4 years later transferred to Waddington where she served on each of the sqns there (44, 100 and 50) ending her days on 50 sqn and retiring surplus to requirements as part of the run down of the final few bombers still in service with in excess of 5000 hrs which was the fleet average in 1983 . To continue flying the aircraft would have needed not only a major service but also additional airframe modifications costing £millions and even then fatigue life would have been minimal. As with 558 on-going support by British Waste of Space (BAe) and other Manufacturers inc Marshals of Cambridge would also have been necessary which as we're all aware they weren't prepared to go too far beyond the design life on safety grounds.

As for XH558, other than the ready availability of 200 series engines 558, as with several of her sister aircraft that had been converted to stop gap tankers were ex Scampton 27 Sqn MRR aircraft which flew medium/high level sorties and therefore did not suffer the same fatigue issues that the rest of the fleet had from flying low level. Thus the airframe was deemed more suitable as a replacement for the display aircraft XL426 (now restored and displayed at Southend Airport) which had reached the end of its fatigue life. Moreover, 558 was only retired from the RAF on cost grounds as her fatigue life dictated a major overhaul to extend life by a few more years which just couldn't be supported financially from the defence budget.