Sea Vixen XP924 Thread

[cg_341]

£2-3mil I'm sure would see the SHAR project up and running, With arguably the Navy's most important post war combat aircraft back displaying in front of the public.

Add a 1 to the front of those numbers and you'd probably be closer to the mark!

[Brevet Cable]

Would it not be cheaper to acquire another Sea Vixen airframe, there's one inside the museum for example, swap all the working bits from XP924 across and start from there rather than try repairing a damaged airframe? Donate XP924 to the donor as the static exhibit when patched back up.

Serious question, I don't know the answer.

Swap if for the one at Bruntingthorpe ( XJ494 ? ) if it's still there.

Better still, swap it for one of the Buccaneers !

Seriously, though -- I'd be surprised if it ever flies again, more so given the timeframe for the funding requirement.
And is there a reason why the funding ( or promise of funding ) has such a short timeframe ?

[DonaldGrump]

Time to patch it up, and wheel it across to the museum. That's much too big a financial undertaking for an aeroplane that has no great resonance with the general public.

Consider it a hell of a lucky escape and be done with it.

Thats the spirit!

[FGR2]

I think that it is end game for the Sea Vixen now I really cannot see anyone pouring £2 million into a niche aircraft like this.

Anyone who has restored anything from a car to a house to an aeroplane will usually tell you what it ends up costing and how long it takes to do is far removed from what you were initially expecting.

I suppose there also the risk there could be more damage once it is fully stripped down as well.

The Sea Vixen has not got the mass appeal of the Vulcan, so is not going to pull in anything like the interest or funds as the Vulcan did.

It was good to see while it lasted though.

[MerlinJon]

Would it not be cheaper to acquire another Sea Vixen airframe, there's one inside the museum for example, swap all the working bits from XP924 across and start from there rather than try repairing a damaged airframe? Donate XP924 to the donor as the static exhibit when patched back up.

Serious question, I don't know the answer.

And why would a Museum give up a complete preserved airframe?

[FGR2]

Would it not be cheaper to acquire another Sea Vixen airframe, there's one inside the museum for example, swap all the working bits from XP924 across and start from there rather than try repairing a damaged airframe? Donate XP924 to the donor as the static exhibit when patched back up.

Serious question, I don't know the answer.

And why would a Museum give up a complete preserved airframe?

And what state would an airframe that has been out in all weathers or not maintained in a suitable condition for 40 years (as most will have been), be in?

I would imagine a lot of corrosion would have happened in that time, then every pipe would need to be replaced, every bit of wiring, hydraulics, every bit of kit would need to be stripped out, replaced or swapped in. It would probably cost considerably more that repairing XP924.

[PhilEAF92]

Maybe those nice chaps at the Vulcan to the Sky can take her on, second thought might be easier to get a pig to fly.

Though I missed her at Duxford, as we went on Sunday, I'm really pleased the pilot came away unhurt and he did a great job in bringing her in the way he did.

Sad to see her go, but what a happy ending with the pilot getting out unhurt.

[Flare Path]

I have supported this wonderful aircraft since it's return to flight, but sadly I do not have the financial power to help her generate the significant sums required and I think this might be the end of her journey (at least for now).

They could seek a sponsor, but possibly at the loss of what is painted on the side - maybe Red Bull would have her back? But one would think to generate the sort of sums being speculated, you would need something like (sponsor) to even get close to your target.

I hope this isn't the end for good, but if it is; it's been great seeing her fly again.

[FGR2]

With the cloud of Shoreham still hanging over classic jets, is any sponsor going to want to put their company name and reputation to an aircraft that has had a few mishaps/reliability issues in recent years?

You are going to need to find a brave sponsor to stump up £2 million for it to show up to a handful of airshows in 5 years time, with the risk that it has another mishap requiring even more money being needed (or worse).

I think that the only realistic option is a donation from a benefactor of some sorts.

[Alanko]

Time to patch it up, and wheel it across to the museum. That's much too big a financial undertaking for an aeroplane that has no great resonance with the general public.

Consider it a hell of a lucky escape and be done with it.

I agree. Not the most positive outcome, but the most realistic. I was reading Aeroplane (I think) earlier this month, and there was an article discussing the decline in historic fast jets in the UK. I didn't realise the extent of this even before Shoreham. Unfortunately the Sea Vixen was the standout aircraft on a list of fliers that comprised little more than Gnats, JPs and Strikemasters. By the time they hypothetically get the Sea Vixen back to flying condition I wonder if the interest and appetite will be there.

I'm also not a fan of the notion of plundering other Sea Vixens for parts. I think every surviving airframe should stand on its own merits, rather than be viewed as a potential parts mule.

[mrshu]

My view is that all the aviation museums in this country, particularly the large ones along with the organisations flying vintage aircraft such as the BBMF, TVOC, etc should "ALL" club together and "SORT THIS OUT" financially at a time when the team at Yeovilton need it most - "Support each other" - "one for all and all for one" in this most unfortunate situation. What with many private vintage jet displays now grounded due to Shoreham, it really highlights the fact even more to support such a professional organisation as the Royal Navy Historic Trust / Navy Wings etc. These guys do some absolutely amazing work to keep these incredible aircraft in the sky. The Sea Vixen is to the Navy what the Hunter is to the Airforce. We simply cannot afford to loose such a unique aircraft. As has been said many times here already, this aircraft needs the help from "everyone" who is involved in keeping these historic airframes where they belong - in the air. So come on, everyone must support this desperate plea immediately! Come on TVOC, divert some funds to the Sea Vixen now - since they spent far too long in the shadow of your mighty Vulcan and now this! Dr Plemming - time to do your bit!!! Forget your Canberra for now and support the Sea Vixen instead, you owe it to them to get this fund raiser going via your own website!!! You had your "many millions" from the public now do your bit for an aircraft that "CAN" remain airworthy! I know I'm probably clutching at straws in view of the overall situation and having read the responses so far but if the Sea Vixen goes, then it really is the beginning of the end for vintage jets. This isn't a mickey mouse set up, it's a professional organisation that "can do this" if everybody pulls together unlike they did up until the crash landing with the support for their appeal fund still woefully small compared to the money still pouring in to the "grounded" Vulcan fund! Food for thought, you only have to see how many private Spitfires are now flying in the UK and the money that must be pouring in to support their rebuilds / restorations by many - yes many rich individuals who love playing with these very expensive machines!
Nobody wants to admit it's game over just yet even though many of us might think so - let's save the Sea Vixen while there is still a chance!

[Dan O'Hagan]

"Has anybody approached Richard Branson?"

[FGR2]

The TVOC don't have any money to spare.

The Classic Jet scene is in terminal decline (as is the airshow scene) in my opinion. Try finding an airshow with any jets or BBMF involvement for example in my county of Essex this year. You could count it on a couple of fingers.

When we are losing more historically important and cheaper to operate less complex aircraft, like the Meteor T7, with more likely to follow, what hope is there for people digging deep to support the relatively unknown and expensive to operate Sea Vixen?

If money had been available before and the right environment for operations, I would have hoped the it would have been put towards significantly more important aircraft like the Meteors/Vampire/Canberra PR9, all of which have been reliably and safely operated on the airshow circuit in recent years

[Dan O'Hagan]

My view is that all the aviation museums in this country, particularly the large ones along with the organisations flying vintage aircraft such as the BBMF, TVOC, etc should "ALL" get together and "SORT THIS OUT" financially at a time when the team at Yeovilton need it most - "Support each other" - "one for all and all for one" in this most unfortunate situation. What with many private vintage jet displays now grounded due to Shoreham, it really highlights the fact even more to support such a professional organisation as the Royal Navy Historic Trust / Navy Wings etc. These guys do some absolutely amazing work to keep these incredible aircraft in the sky. The Sea Vixen is to the Navy what the Hunter is to the Airforce. We simply cannot afford to loose such a unique aircraft. As has been said many times here already, this aircraft needs the help from "everyone" who is involved in keeping these historic airframes where they belong - in the air. So come on, everyone must support this desperate plea immediately! Come on TVOC, divert some funds to the Sea Vixen now - since they spent far too long in the shadow of your mighty Vulcan and now this! Dr Plemming - time to do your bit!!! Forget your Canberra for now and support the Sea Vixen instead, you owe it to them to get this fund raiser going via your own website!!! You had your "many millions" from the public now do your bit for an aircraft that "CAN" remain airworthy! I know I'm probably clutching at straws in view of the overall situation and having read the responses so far but if the Sea Vixen goes, then it really is the beginning of the end for vintage jets. This isn't a mickey mouse set up, it's a professional organisation that "can do this" if everybody pulls together unlike they did up until the crash landing with the support for their appeal fund still woefully small compared to the money still pouring in to the "grounded" Vulcan fund! Food for thought, you only have to see how many private Spitfires are now flying in the UK and the money that must be pouring in to support their rebuilds / restorations by many - yes many rich individuals who love playing with these very expensive machines!
Nobody wants to admit it's game over just yet even though many of us might think so - let's save the Sea Vixen while there is still a chance!

And breathe...

What makes you think money is still pouring into VTTS? What has this to do with Plemming (sic)? Why on earth should the BBMF "come together" with anyone to support an aircraft out of their remit, and of no interest to them?

FNHT need to stand on their own two feet with this one, either they can raise the estimated costs (which I imagine to be a conservative estimate) or they don't even start risking throwing good money at an aircraft which has proven in recent years to be unreliable at best, at worst downright dangerous.

Classic jets remain toxic, and will do at least until Shoreham's "legacy" is addressed through the courts in the coming years. Let the Sea Vixen go, it won't fly again.

[DonaldGrump]

Would you like to make clear in what way this aircraft has been dangerous?

Display flying is dangerous regardless of the aircraft. The Sea Vixen no more than other vintage aircraft. It frankly seems to me that many on here are fast becoming turkeys screaming for more xmas. Why not have done with it and ban vintage aircraft doing flying displays across the board, and then hope to god nobody gets killed whilst indulging in whatever alternative they find to attending or participating in the air shows that are soon to be no longer at this rate.

[Dan O'Hagan]

Would you like to make clear in what way this aircraft has been dangerous?

Display flying is dangerous regardless of the aircraft. The Sea Vixen no more than other vintage aircraft. It frankly seems to me that many on here are fast becoming turkeys screaming for more xmas. Why not have done with it and ban vintage aircraft doing flying displays across the board, and then hope to god nobody gets killed whilst indulging in whatever alternative they find to attending or participating in the air shows that are soon to be no longer at this rate.

Gear collapse at Hurn in 2012 and damaging its flaps in flight last year dangerous enough for you?

Lovely aeroplane, but one that never seems too far from needing repairs. You can only tweak the nose of fate so many times. £3m to tweak it some more is plain foolhardy.

[Adie1980]

Would you like to make clear in what way this aircraft has been dangerous?

Display flying is dangerous regardless of the aircraft. The Sea Vixen no more than other vintage aircraft. It frankly seems to me that many on here are fast becoming turkeys screaming for more xmas. Why not have done with it and ban vintage aircraft doing flying displays across the board, and then hope to god nobody gets killed whilst indulging in whatever alternative they find to attending or participating in the air shows that are soon to be no longer at this rate.

Gear collapse at Hurn in 2012 and damaging its flaps in flight last year dangerous enough for you?

Lovely aeroplane, but one that never seems too far from needing repairs. You can only tweak the nose of fate so many times. £3m to tweak it some more is plain foolhardy.

Gear collapse was pilot error, not an aircraft safety issue

[Dan O'Hagan]

Still an accident involving the aeroplane, regardless of cause. Shoreham was proven to be, at least in part, pilot error, and we've not seen a Hunter at an airshow since.

[FGR2]

Would you like to make clear in what way this aircraft has been dangerous?

Display flying is dangerous regardless of the aircraft. The Sea Vixen no more than other vintage aircraft. It frankly seems to me that many on here are fast becoming turkeys screaming for more xmas. Why not have done with it and ban vintage aircraft doing flying displays across the board, and then hope to god nobody gets killed whilst indulging in whatever alternative they find to attending or participating in the air shows that are soon to be no longer at this rate.

Gear collapse at Hurn in 2012 and damaging its flaps in flight last year dangerous enough for you?

Lovely aeroplane, but one that never seems too far from needing repairs. You can only tweak the nose of fate so many times. £3m to tweak it some more is plain foolhardy.

Gear collapse was pilot error, not an aircraft safety issue

I thought it was a bit of both, correct me if I am wrong, if I remember the gear shouldn't have retracted, as a micro switch should have prevented this. I seem to recall that the gear (after the aircraft being fitted with drop tanks), had not been set up correctly and had not compressed sufficiently. The aircraft thought it was in the air and up went the gear, crunch!

[DonaldGrump]

Would you like to make clear in what way this aircraft has been dangerous?

Display flying is dangerous regardless of the aircraft. The Sea Vixen no more than other vintage aircraft. It frankly seems to me that many on here are fast becoming turkeys screaming for more xmas. Why not have done with it and ban vintage aircraft doing flying displays across the board, and then hope to god nobody gets killed whilst indulging in whatever alternative they find to attending or participating in the air shows that are soon to be no longer at this rate.

Gear collapse at Hurn in 2012 and damaging its flaps in flight last year dangerous enough for you?

Lovely aeroplane, but one that never seems too far from needing repairs. You can only tweak the nose of fate so many times. £3m to tweak it some more is plain foolhardy.

No not nearly dangerous enough, if you expect old aircraft (or new for that matter) to operate without a glitch then you really must support the complete abolition of flying displays for the public.

Would you say that the Lancaster should be grounded because that has had more proplems than the Vixen over the last few years? cant have that flying over the fields of Lincolnshire with an engine fire just in case it falls onto a couple of copulating trespassers in a hay stack as the compensation would bankrupt the RAF.

[FGR2]

The only thing I would say is the Lancaster does do a large number of shows each year, and it's reliability is pretty good. I am probably right in saying that engine fire (and probably one or two gear issues) were it's only major incidents in 40 or so years. It is all simple 1940s technology as well, so it is easy to repair

[DonaldGrump]

The only thing I would say is the Lancaster does do a large number of shows each year, and it's reliability is pretty good. I am probably right in saying that engine fire (and probably one or two gear issues) were it's only major incidents in 40 or so years. It is all simple 1940s technology as well, so it is easy to repair

Of course I am not for one minute suggesting it should not continue doing lots of shows for decades to come, but at the end of the day it regardless of age falls out of the sky onto someone the consequences are not going to be good. My point about all this sudden screaming about safety seems to miss the fact that until Shoreham no members of the public have died as a result of an aircraft coming down at an airshow since the Farnborough crash until Shoreham. It seems fairly certain that it will remain the case that nobody has died due to a mechanical, structural failure since that day, if we accept there was nothing wrong with the Hunter at Shoreham.

To suggest the Sea Vixen has been a danger any more than any other display aircraft in my opinion is absolute rubbish. I would even suggest that given the high chance of the much loved media trash journalists held in such high esteem on here passing through this parish in search of tit bits, Dan's comments could at best feed the trolls and at worse be responsible for scaremongering and doing yet more damage to our air show industry.

[Pat Murphy]

Still an accident involving the aeroplane, regardless of cause. Shoreham was proven to be, at least in part, pilot error, and we've not seen a Hunter at an airshow since.

Quite right Dan, I mean, last year the BBMF Lancaster caught fire, I say ground it now. Recently somewhere in the world, an airliner, I forget which type it was, had an incident. Ground that now, In fact flying...I mean it's just so dangerous we had better just.....

Oh you get the drift. The Sea Vixen has been particularly unlucky but, the only thing barring it's return to the sky to be operated professionally, is a lack of funds not safety. If you read the article in Aeroplane regarding classic jet operators, you will find that although the scene has obviously been in decline in recent years, there have been meetings between the operators and the CAA recently (Jonathon Whaley involved) that may have a positive outcome regarding the Hunter at least. The continuing grounding of the type is becoming increasingly untenable and may be open to legal challenge. I look forward to seeing a Hunter in the sky again soon.

As for the Vixen? Yes it may be time for flying to end but please it is NOT because it's dangerous and I am disappointed that you would smear a professional organisation in this way, by assuming that they would continue to operate said "Dangerous" aircraft at risk to the pilot et al.

Pat

[vulcan558]

Well if you got a team like TVOC involved, then the cost would not be 2 or 3 million. It
Would be more like 23 million.

[strangelookingalien]

The danger that aircraft pose is so alarmingly small it is ridiculous. The only reason anyone makes a fuss about air accidents is because they are spectacular, in the true sense of the word. There are plenty of other horrendously dangerous things that go on every day with little regulation and no public outcry; I think its pretty pathetic that there's people on an aviation forum suggesting that classic aircraft are, in the grand scheme of things, dangerous. Shoreham was a freak event. It was horrible, but frankly it doesn't deserve the huge outcry it's garnered.