Vulcan to the Skies

[bongodriver]

Everyone has their faults.......glass houses.

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Everyone has their faults.......glass houses.

You might want to reconsider your project to build a glass house. It's not worth the cost, and you'll have to invest even more money in curtains once it's done.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by IamNotDavid

You might want to reconsider your project to build a glass house. It's not worth the cost, and you'll have to invest even more money in curtains once it's done.

?

Originally Posted by bongodriver

?

I was overreacting to your comment about living in glass houses.

[winny]

I think that this discusson is overlooking the fact that the UK is no longer producing it's own warplanes.. (Thanks Maggie and co.).

All we have is a History of building them, so I think in general we're a little reluctant to let them go. (Cue lots of 'I remember when Britain was great' type statements). It's another in a long line of British engineering projects that get re-hashed/restored simply out of a long lost national pride in building stuff.

Whatever the motivation the Vulcan as an Aircraft is worth seeing when it flies. I think that the aviation/air show world is better off having a flying vulcan than not having one, if only so that people get to see it. If people wanna donate that's fine. The fact that it's a nuclear bomber is irrelevant to me, after all, all warplanes were designed to kill and if you start arguing that one type of killing is better/worse than another than you're morally lost.

It's more about herritage and lost industry than the celebration of a bomber designed to wipe cities off the map.

Old warplanes are all, without exception, money pits. To say that spending 4.5 million on the Vulcan is a waste of money is entirely subjective. It totally depends on if you think it's worth it. Some do some don't, ce la vie.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by winny

I think that this discusson is overlooking the fact that the UK is no longer producing it's own warplanes.. (Thanks Maggie and co.).

All we have is a History of building them, so I think in general we're a little reluctant to let them go. (Cue lots of 'I remember when Britain was great' type statements). It's another in a long line of British engineering projects that get re-hashed/restored simply out of a long lost national pride in building stuff.

Whatever the motivation the Vulcan as an Aircraft is worth seeing when it flies. I think that the aviation/air show world is better off having a flying vulcan than not having one, if only so that people get to see it. If people wanna donate that's fine. The fact that it's a nuclear bomber is irrelevant to me, after all, all warplanes were designed to kill and if you start arguing that one type of killing is better/worse than another than you're morally lost.

It's more about herritage and lost industry than the celebration of a bomber designed to wipe cities off the map.

Old warplanes are all, without exception, money pits. To say that spending 4.5 million on the Vulcan is a waste of money is entirely subjective. It totally depends on if you think it's worth it. Some do some don't, ce la vie.

Winny I already made this very argument but someone seems to be a .little upset because they are selling baseball caps

[winny]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Winny I already made this very argument but someone seems to be a .little upset because they are selling baseball caps

They're selling baseball caps!!??? How dare they!

Quick, somebody call the merchandise police.

Just for the record I like the Vulcan. I'm glad that people get a chance to see it in the air. In the same way I'm glad there are Spit's, 51's, Vampires, sabres Migs, Phantoms et al.

The Vulcan is part of the celebration of flight through the ages. Not a celebration of an attack on Port Stanley.

Flying the Vulcan in the Olympic opening ceremonies is stupid. They should fly a Spitfire and a Hurricane. Nothing else comes close.