UK Heritage Aviation Trust

[Brevet Cable]

And even then they lived hand-to-mouth, playing 'rob Peter to pay Paul' ( by looking at which creditor they could get away with not paying so they could pay the others ) lurching from one financial crisis to the next and only surviving due to six-figure lump sums being stumped up at the last minute by mysterious benefactors & philanthropists.

[XP282]

Matthew,
VTTS had some quite major differences to UKHAT. First off THEY HAD AN AIRCRAFT! Secondly, they had expertise involved in the in the form of ex RAF (perhaps still serving at the time?) engineers etc. UKHAT has no experts. You are a bunch of amateurs.... don't be offended by that. It's a fact. Who in the management of UKHAT has experience in operating aircraft?

As for the list of people you have spoken too, again I'm sorry but that doesn't really impress me. It's clear that you spoke to Coventry.... and you've spoken to an insurance company. I can call ARCo tomorrow and talk to them about Spitfire maintenace... I can also get an insurance quote too, but it doesn't make me any more credible when I say I'm going to operate a Spitfire next year.

IF you are serious about this then do something meaningful, and do it soon, because at the moment I think you are shining a bad light of aircraft preservation. I have to say, I think the closest thing we'll see to a UKHAT operated aircraft is one of Duncan's chickens trying to make a break for freedom in a chicken run style!

[Dan O'Hagan]

If you're asking for hundreds of thousands of pounds from the public, you need an awful lot more than a Brexit-supporting part-time egg-seller, a few vague assurances and a schoolboy running a website. As others have said, you need experience (not eggsperience) of owning, restoring and operating aeroplanes. Successfully. Right now, the "team" has none of that. And even less credibility.

[Wissam24]

you need experience (not eggsperience) .

1000% savage

[Brevet Cable]

Not this one, though, I take it.....

[Beech18Boy]

So 167 and the Venoms have gone down the pan?

[Reds Rolling]

Claiming Europe is socialist is hardly level headed...

I said 'more' level headed than DOH. The bar was hardly set high!

If you're asking for hundreds of thousands of pounds from the public, you need an awful lot more than a Brexit-supporting part-time egg-seller.

What about if he was a Bremainer-supporting part-time egg seller. Would that be ok?

[Vampire 1973]

Claiming Europe is socialist is hardly level headed...

I said 'more' level headed than DOH. The bar was hardly set high!

If you're asking for hundreds of thousands of pounds from the public, you need an awful lot more than a Brexit-supporting part-time egg-seller.

What about if he was a Bremainer-supporting part-time egg seller. Would that be ok?

I wonder how many of their critics actually run or are involved with Heritage organisations? or do they just spend their time on here criticising others? they clearly need a few more people to help get things going and perhaps some helpful guidance is anyone on here willing to help?

further, up the thread, someone mentioned the Handley Page Herald, why shouldn't they try and save her, she is a valuable example of British Aviation just not as glamorous as a fighter or bomber.

[XP282]

I wonder how many of their critics actually run or are involved with Heritage organisations? or do they just spend their time on here criticising others? they clearly need a few more people to help get things going and perhaps some helpful guidance is anyone on here willing to help?

further, up the thread, someone mentioned the Handley Page Herald, why shouldn't they try and save her, she is a valuable example of British Aviation just not as glamorous as a fighter or bomber.

Vampire,
If it gives any more weight to personal opinions, then yes, I have been involved in operating vintage aircraft and saving national 'treasures'!! I know what was involved in something as simple as that and it wasn't simple! - Having said all that, I don't think you have to have been involved in the subject to have an opinion. I've never been involved in sailing, but the UKHBT was formed (B for boating) and they said the planned to raise the titanic, I think my opinion would be valid!

So, in my opinion here's the thing with UKHAT. You suggest that we offer them helpful guidance. There are lots of people who can do that, but until they know what they want to be, it is very hard to offer guidance. I understood that their aim was to operate a vintage jet (I think they also want to remanufacture parts??). They got to that point after publicly talking about all other options including operating a heavy piston liner, going to shows etc. They then run a donation campaign to raise £xx to buy a vampire (a Swiss one if I'm not mistaken - UKHAT ). They have two campaigns running at the same time which is alarming for some. Between them they got pocket money pledged and nothing happens. Yes, its a start, but lets be realistic about this. But still, then want to operate a vintage jet. Then (after loads of other things have come and gone) a HP Herald needs saving. IF they go down the route of saving the Herald, that will be it... That will take all of their time, effort and resource. I'm not against it but....

So, UKHAT. If I can help with advice then this is it.... Decide what it is that you want to be, and then go for it. You cant be a jack of all trades, master of none. You need a clear vision. But you need to be focused and professional about it. You may think that the personal views of your Chairman aren't relevant, but when you go to BAe or RR and ask for support, I can assure you that the public image of your Charman will be relevant. Personally, I wish you success, but I don't think it will amount to anything. My advice if I were to give it, would be to try and link up with another organisation who are struggling and see if you can support them. Dare I say try talking to VTTS and ask about their Canberra... There's a future flyer sat doing nothing. Fund raise for them, and try and be part of it. Honestly, I think you are up against it but here's the important part.... don't mess it up for future projects. Aircraft preservation doesn't always have a great reputation, thanks largely to one or two individuals spoiling it for the rest of us (I wont mention names).... Don't make it three.

[Skymonster]

The Herald mentioned previously is totally seperate of UKHAT and we are just helping the group with their aims by sharing our contacts and offering to volunteer.

I personally think that at this stage you'd be better off concentrating on getting UKHAT properly up and running, and proving it could work, rather than spending time getting involved in a project like the Herald which should have somewhat different aims. UKHAT has now been around for six months and it seems to me little has happened other it now has a pretty ropey website and several people with fancy titles. I was pretty keen on supporting the Herald project in what little way I could but now I'm much less sure - the discussion about a hangar for it shows just how preposterously out of touch those who suggested it are with what is realistic for a project like the Herald. Day dreamers? The Herald does not need a UKHAT - or at least it doesn't need what UKHAT had ambitions to be when it was kicked off six months ago - it needs a bunch of people who are prepared to get on with it and do some hard work, rather than endless discussions and little action.

Meanwhile, I am still rather confused about what UKHAT is really trying to achieve. Is it still - as was suggested at the top of this topic - trying to buy a Vampire and fly it? The website doesn't seem to mention that. What happened to the fundraising effort? All the website seems to mention is an evening presentation in Coventry in three months time that seems to have little direct connection with preserving former military aircraft. Other than that the website has little of substance that really tells me what UKHAT is doing - otherwise it largely comprises pictures of aircraft, most of which are already in pretty safe hand. I think a very clear set of achievable and realistic objectives (including what aircraft are in the pipeline), a business plan that supporerts can understand and relate to, clarity over who is involved and what their background is, and regular clear active marketing are the least that are required before any further attempts at fundraising recommence.

[MrBean]

I have to say this seems to be another group bound for failure. What expertise or experience does anybody within UKHAT have when it comes to fundraising, and then the operation of vintage jets? To any of us at least, it seems that you have very little if any - somewhat troubling if you want anybody to hand over any of their money.

It's all very well giving assurances that you have connections and have been talking to engineers and operators, but without any realistic business plan or money it all comes to nothing. I could email an operator or maintenance firm looking for aircraft and suitable care to keep them airworthy and get a quote, but unless I have the money to pay for them, and a good plan to continue funding the operation it can't come to anything anyway.

There is very little information available on your future plans, nor much reason to trust that those in UKHAT have any idea about what they're doing. All that taken into account, people just aren't going to give over their money to UKHAT rather than another operation with a real chance and skills set necessary to maintain and operate vintage aircraft. I'm far happier donating to the likes of Vulcan Restoration Trust at Southend for example, at least they actually can keep that aircraft in good condition.

[Skymonster]

Seems like UKHAT's latest target is the HP Herald G-CEXP which for many years has been festering at Gatwick with the fire service. A page for the aircraft has appeared on the UKHAT website, and Duncan Halford has been saying on Facebook that he hopes it will eventually be fast taxiable (it needs to be moved from Gatwick and some serviceable engines found first, as it has none at present). Hmmm...

[Jetnoise]

And good luck with getting a pair of engines for that - the first thing stripped from the Heralds when retired were the engines for re-use on F-27s.

Cheers,
Ralph

[speedbird2639]

From their Facebook page today

We are pleased to say XP now has her own logo. So we will now be getting on and sorting out merchandise for the new year. We feel we are heading in the right direction

You can see the logo in all its glory Here

[Skymonster]

I was delighted when I first learned this Herald might be rescued. Recently I have become far less enamoured. Glad the real priorities are being sorted - like a banner... (sarcasm). I am really unsure what qualifies those involved with UKHAT to manage a project such as this, particularly given the stalled efforts of earlier in the year. Oh well, I guess time will tell.

[wv383]

I was delighted when I first learned this Herald might be rescued. Recently I have become far less enamoured. Glad the real priorities are being sorted - like a banner... (sarcasm). I am really unsure what qualifies those involved with UKHAT to manage a project such as this, particularly given the stalled efforts of earlier in the year. Oh well, I guess time will tell.

Also, I think it is a bit deceiving to use a photo of Meteor WM167 as their header page when it is nothing to do with the trust and has been sold to a new owner in the USA. Frankly, if they haven't actually got an aircraft of their own then they should use a logo as a header rather than a photo of someone else's aircraft. Just my opinion.

[Amp]

Perhaps a reference to Handley Page would not go amiss in the logo...

[XP282]

From their Facebook page today

We are pleased to say XP now has her own logo. So we will now be getting on and sorting out merchandise for the new year. We feel we are heading in the right direction

You can see the logo in all its glory Here

A very misleading logo.... Herald skyward.... For an aircraft that has no prospects of flying again. I think its very misleading. Along with the self proclaimed 'trust' title.

I see the first task is a full structural survey.... Wouldn't it have been wise to do that before committing to the project? I would trust them with 50p of my money, never mind a serious donation.

[cg_341]

Can UKHAT_OFFICIAL please, for the love of God, explain what they're thinking here?

[capercaillie]

So, what everybody is funding is an aviation tat stall? Still if the items get bigger each time, eventually you may be able to purchase a life size Herald replica.

[Tommy]

So, if I read that correctly "donate to us so we can make things which you can buy from us".

That's not an amazing approach, tbh...

It's also not amazing that this has to be clarified in a Facebook comment thread somewhere. That's very easy for people to miss. Clarity must be present on the very face of it.

Hopefully this isn't seen as the full two barrells, but it sort of is, my thoughts on UKHAT in the wider sense:

*breathes in*

Charities are hard work. To convince people to give their hard-earned to you is extraordinarily difficult. They wont do it if they think they will be fleeced, and despite what I am sure are good intentions, asking people to pay for something which they can then pay again to buy back isn't the right way about it, IMO. Sometimes you've got to dip into your own pockets to get this ball rolling, be that already-existing funds, or a loan, or some other way, and merchandise should surely be one of the first things you fund, as that will start putting money into the coffers. People are more likely to pay money for something than to give that money away. This all should have been factored-in when UKHAT created its business plan, including how long the Trust envisages that initial funding boost being paid-back - if this has not happened, then something/somebody requesting my money that either has an inadequate business plan, or does not have one at all, will swiftly push me somewhere else. And if the business plan does exist, but no funds have been put forward by members to get the ball rolling, then what message does that put to the outside world, if the organisation is not confident of investing in the project themselves, and if funds *have* been put in, then why was merchandise (which, as I say, must surely be the first thing that starts making money for UKHAT) missed-out?

And speaking of the "Trust", has charitable status been gained yet? Their Facebook page states quite clearly that they expected a response "around" 28th November", but there's been no announcement of what the response is yet. Gaining charitable status is and should be, huge news for any burgeoning charities. If no response has been had, where is the update, and (more importantly) chase it with the Charities Commission. If you put a date out there in public, make sure you stick to it.

I'm very uneasy of the self-declaration of "Trust". It's misleading. The term "Trust" has very specific and very important legal implications, and it's in my view very inappropriate and misleading to use a specific legal title without actually being a Trust (unless I'm mistaken and trustees are appointed already).

Likewise, gaining "charitable status" is not just a name thing. It gives Charitable Trusts very specific things like huge benefits in taxation - does the Trust really want to be asking for money whilst this is all up in the air? What does the business plan say? If they're taking money for things when they don't yet have charitable status, does their business plan say "we'll be asking for money for XY & Z, before we receive the tax benefits a charitable trust has". If their business plan does not consider this, then why not? And why is this not communicated with the people donating their own money?

It's like over-use of "official" in Facebook groups that are just fan pages. "Official RIAT Nutters" always used to make me laugh - what's official about it? Has the term "RIAT Nutters been sanctioned and approved by RAFCTE, and is it sanctioned and made official in the form and body of a, some say, maligned Facebook group?

I may be dismissed as an "armchair" expert, that's fine, but this sort of stuff matters. They're asking for money. I, as am other forumites and the much wider community of enthusiasts are UKHAT's market, and this is feedback. There are hundreds of aviation-related restoration projects all vying for money from people, and it's a cut-throat market - it's very easy for me and everyone else to go somewhere else with my/their money if there's even a whiff of inadequacy, or a feeling that my money may not go where I want it to go.

None of the above is criticism, I add. I want nothing more than to see things thrive for UKHAT and all other similar charitable institutions, but blind faith and hoping problems go away or just hoping that things work out doesn't work. Hard questions need to be asked, and acted upon.

All of this takes time, it matters, and in my opinion it needs to be resolved waaaaaay before a single penny is asked of someone from outside the organisation, or if not then absolute clarity is key. Put the information out there for people to find. There are a ton more questions in this thread that haven't been answered, or have not been answered sufficiently enough.

I wish this group well, I really do, which is why I've taken a not insignificant amount of time to write an extensive post that will likely be read by no-one, but at present, any spare cash I would be minded to donate would more likely go to an organisation that has established much more confidence than this one has, and I would hope that UKHA(T?) would heed that.

(I hasten to add that the above is all IMO, and I may or may not be incorrect on a number of things - I usually am)

*breathes out*

[Berf]

Hey I read it Tommy - quite agree with you.

[Brevet Cable]

And speaking of the "Trust", has charitable status been gained yet?

Charity Commission website, he say....NO!
I've tried searching for both the full name & the initials, both come up negative.

[HeyfordDave111]

Possibly a great group of well meaning peeps, but coming across as 16 year old keyboard warriors with no set plans and making it up ‘on the hoof’.

Best to either pee in the pot or get off it now guys.

[Dan O'Hagan]

Sorry, but this mob come across as nothing but morons. Anyone stupid enough to give them money deserves all they (don't) get.