Where has XH558 thread gone?

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby MicrolightDriver on Fri 08 Sep 2017, 5:07 pm

Only 14 of the 30 available places left for the morning Engine Run event on 21st October.

The afternoon event on the same day is already sold out.
User avatar
MicrolightDriver

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Phantom 892 on Fri 08 Sep 2017, 5:44 pm

Dan O'Hagan wrote:Why does the aviation press not take this up? I'd much rather read this in a magazine than another "V Bomber Special" or air to air with another warbird.


I can only imagine that it is for the reason that they are turning a blind-eye to it - which is completely wrong.
User avatar
Phantom 892

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby vulcan558 on Fri 08 Sep 2017, 8:03 pm

MicrolightDriver wrote:Only 14 of the 30 available places left for the morning Engine Run event on 21st October.

The afternoon event on the same day is already sold out.

Yep, they will keep flogging the old horse for the wage bill, until it breaks then it will be an appeal to fix her.
vulcan558

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Xm657 on Fri 08 Sep 2017, 10:51 pm

MicrolightDriver wrote:Only 14 of the 30 available places left for the morning Engine Run event on 21st October.

The afternoon event on the same day is already sold out.


Which makes it all the more strange this is the last one this year. Surely it's a good earner and does the aircraft good to be run - I think anti det runs are usually every 28 days.

As I've said before £110 isn't cheap but to stand up really close to it would be something I would consider. However unless I won the lottery I can't imagine I would want to repeat the experience at that price. I wonder how many people there are left willing to have this premium experience - but clearly it's not exhausted yet. Whether it will be worth it next year when hopefully 426 and 655 are taxiing again I really doubt though. Wonder why they aren't maximising the revenue now, especially after training all the volunteers so thoroughly.
Xm657

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby MicrolightDriver on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 8:00 am

Xm657 wrote:
MicrolightDriver wrote:Only 14 of the 30 available places left for the morning Engine Run event on 21st October.

The afternoon event on the same day is already sold out.


Which makes it all the more strange this is the last one this year. Surely it's a good earner and does the aircraft good to be run - I think anti det runs are usually every 28 days.....


I don't know - something to do with safe storage for the winter I believe. I'm sure Taff Stone is making good decisions on the care and maintenance of the aircraft.
User avatar
MicrolightDriver

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby 106500 on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 8:16 am

Might this confound the critics? From the latest vulcan news e-mail:

Important six-month update and review coming next week

"In next Friday's newsletter edition, we bring an update on the Trust, six months on from successful conclusion of the Survival Appeal following significant restructuring of the Trust. We will also give you the latest news on planning for the new hangar, as well as rebutting some of the most common misconceptions we have seen over the intervening months"

Sounds upbeat? :snack:
106500

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby SalFish on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 9:48 am

106500 wrote:Might this confound the critics? From the latest vulcan news e-mail:

Important six-month update and review coming next week

"In next Friday's newsletter edition, we bring an update on the Trust, six months on from successful conclusion of the Survival Appeal following significant restructuring of the Trust. We will also give you the latest news on planning for the new hangar, as well as rebutting some of the most common misconceptions we have seen over the intervening months"

Sounds upbeat? :snack:

Doesn't it always?
SalFish

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Brevet Cable on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 12:17 pm

... as well as rebutting some of the most common misconceptions we have seen over the intervening months

Somehow I doubt any of the important questions will get answered, though.

I expect it'll be the usual....
Some
Image

A lot of
Image

And masses of
Image


:whistle:
Unofficial forum brauer und winzer
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby aviodromefriend on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 5:03 pm

MicrolightDriver wrote:I'm sure Taff Stone is making good decisions on the care and maintenance of the aircraft.
As far as I understand from the VTTS forum, Taff Stone has moved to another job. He only returns for days they run the engines.
A weather forecast is a forecast and just that

Mike Moses, Launch Integration Manager Space Shuttle Program
User avatar
aviodromefriend

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby IP1960 on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 5:30 pm

106500 wrote: We will also give you the latest news on planning for the new hangar


There is still nothing on the Doncaster Planning Portal, so whatever plans there are, are going to be some time in the execution.
IP1960

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Xm657 on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 5:35 pm

Yes Taff new has a full time job but dpes ad hoc work for the VttST, is what he said when I spoke to him a month ago. However he is passionate about 558 and I get the impression he would do anything he could to take care of her paid or not. Maybe this "winter storage" is some indoor hangerage has become available? It doesn't make sense to not run the engines while she is stored outside and if they are to be anti det run they might aswell have paying guests to offset the fuel cost. If they are going to inhibit the engines again someone will have to be paid to do it - Sad Sams post stated it was two days work.

Maybe this new announcement can clear up what is involved with this "winter storage". Hopefully they can also "rebutt the common misconception" that there are 10+ salaried staff running a two aircraft musuem that isn't open to the public...
Xm657

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Brevet Cable on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 6:21 pm

To break things down, though.....
From the podcast DanO' did with Dr Pleming, it was stated that they did have a staff of 22 people....5 engineers, 5 people running Hangar 3, 3 people doing merchandising, 4 Directors & 3 'customer facing' staff ( he missed 2 out )
He also said that only 2 engineers were retained - Taff & Rick Lee - on 'zero hour' contracts.
14 were made redundant, so that left 8.
The webstore assistant was apparently taken back on, so that makes 9
It's been stated that the webstore manager, his assistant, the admin manager, her assistant, the remote stock sales manager, his assistant, the admin manager at Doncaster, his assistant and the Engineering director are on full-time contracts.
The 'Facilities Manager' apparently returned from maternity leave, so unless they've now been made redundant that would mean there are now 10 staff employed.

Anyone who shouldn't be on there, or anyone who's been missed out ?
Unofficial forum brauer und winzer
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby IgnatiusJReilly on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 6:45 pm

Just reading the VTTS forum... regarding the number of employees, one of the posts that caught my attention suggests that post the redundancies, "Robert made his own role redundant. He now provides CEO services on a consultancy basis."
Presumably, and I know it's a big assumption, might they be 'paid CEO services'?

Would anyone know if, in the accounts returned, consultancy services are considered separately from salary?
i.e. is it possible that an individual could be paid, for example, in excess of £60k in salary for one role but then also get paid thousands in consultancy fees for another role?
Last edited by IgnatiusJReilly on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Eccentric, idealistic, and creative, sometimes to the point of delusion..
IgnatiusJReilly

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Xm657 on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 7:17 pm

IgnatiusJReilly wrote:Would anyone know if, in the accounts returned, consultancy services are considered separately from salary?


Yes this is entirely possible and quite common. The CEO of my old company did just this taking 50% of his "salary" as pay rolled wages, and invoicing the company for the other 50% as "consultancy services". The reason in my company was complicated and do with taxation and relative salary levels of other directors, but absolutely no reason why this cannot be done.

I think (hope) though Mr Pleming is now taking a modest part time fee to cover his costs in trying to get the hangar built and progress Enta. As I've said before, for the amount of time and effort he has personally put into the project over 20 years (and compared to what he could have earned in his previous career), I don't begrudge him the salary he drew in the past. However, I don't believe the organisation can stand a large payroll any longer and think 558 should now be looked after on a 100% voluntary basis - something that works so well for 655 and 426.
Xm657

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby XR219 on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 7:58 pm

Categorically, Dr Pleming was paid for one function via one method, appearing in one line in the accounts.

I deeply object to 'carefully obscured'; it implies collusion from a number of individuals, of which I would be one. Grateful if it could be retracted and we could move on.

The current situation is as XM suggests.
@steveliddle558
Vulcan to the Sky Trust Trustee (although expressing my own views)
XR219

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby IgnatiusJReilly on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 8:11 pm

XR219 wrote:The current situation is as XM suggests.


Are you confirming that Dr Pleming receives a salary AND consultancy payments?
Is this the case for any other employees?
Eccentric, idealistic, and creative, sometimes to the point of delusion..
IgnatiusJReilly

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 8:12 pm

XR219 wrote:Categorically, Dr Pleming was paid for one function via one method, appearing in one line in the accounts.

I deeply object to 'carefully obscured'; it implies collusion from a number of individuals, of which I would be one. Grateful if it could be retracted and we could move on.

The current situation is as XM suggests.


Indeed. People need to be very mindful of what they post. Suggesting moral wrong-doing is one thing, implying criminality is quite another, and something the moderators need to be very wise to.
User avatar
Dan O'Hagan

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby XR219 on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 8:52 pm

IgnatiusJReilly wrote:
XR219 wrote:The current situation is as XM suggests.


Are you confirming that Dr Pleming receives a salary AND consultancy payments?
Is this the case for any other employees?



Because (if I squint) I can see how you might have got the wrong end of the stick, my reference was to Xm657's suggestion about Dr Pleming being a part time consultant on a modest fee.

I was polite I think. Are you still proposing in writing that the CEO had his hands in the till and that I signed it off? Just so we're clear.
@steveliddle558
Vulcan to the Sky Trust Trustee (although expressing my own views)
XR219

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby IgnatiusJReilly on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 9:27 pm

XR219 wrote:
IgnatiusJReilly wrote:
XR219 wrote:The current situation is as XM suggests.


Are you confirming that Dr Pleming receives a salary AND consultancy payments?
Is this the case for any other employees?



Because (if I squint) I can see how you might have got the wrong end of the stick, my reference was to Xm657's suggestion about Dr Pleming being a part time consultant on a modest fee.
I was polite I think. Are you still proposing in writing that the CEO had his hands in the till and that I signed it off? Just so we're clear.


No, I was absolutely not proposing that 'the CEO had his hands in the till' as you phrase it.
I was asking "if, in the accounts returned, consultancy services are considered separately from salary?"

I don't have expertise in this area, hence the question. My understanding is that this is an entirely legitimate thing to do, but as you'll understand, for the layman looking at the accounts, it would not be obvious to them if the same individual was being paid a salary and also charging consultancy fees.
From the responses given here, it would seem to me that yes this can legally be done, but you confirmed that this is not the case with Dr Plemming.
Eccentric, idealistic, and creative, sometimes to the point of delusion..
IgnatiusJReilly

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby DonaldGrump on Sat 09 Sep 2017, 10:09 pm

Dan O'Hagan wrote:
XR219 wrote:Categorically, Dr Pleming was paid for one function via one method, appearing in one line in the accounts.

I deeply object to 'carefully obscured'; it implies collusion from a number of individuals, of which I would be one. Grateful if it could be retracted and we could move on.

The current situation is as XM suggests.


Indeed. People need to be very mindful of what they post. Suggesting moral wrong-doing is one thing, implying criminality is quite another, and something the moderators need to be very wise to.



Wow I am speechless.
DonaldGrump

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Brevet Cable on Sun 10 Sep 2017, 5:17 am

On the subject of the accounts....
As previously posted, they clearly state ( Page 9 if anyone wants to check ) :
The Trust had 19 full-time employees and 5 part-time employees (including 9 aircrew) as at 31 October 2016, plus a number of contractors and consultants

Yet Bill Ramsey replied to the post containing this by stating :
....with regard to 9 Aircrew still being employed at the end of 2016, I find that hard to fathom. I can categorically tell you that 6 of the seven crew flying the aircraft at the end were 'terminated' at the end of February 2016, leaving only the Chief Pilot/Ops Director. One or 2 ex-Aircrew may have been retained but no idea how that number gets to nine.

So are the accounts incorrect and there weren't 9 aircrew employed ( either full- or part-time ) ?
Is Bill Ramsey incorrect in what he says ?
Or is it that the accounts are poorly worded - other than the fact that "as at" makes no sense - and that instead of reading "as at 31 October 2016" it should actually say something along the lines of "in the year ending 31 October 2016" ( so covering the period these accounts are for ) ?

The accounts are also confusing by the fact that they state :
The average monthly number of employees during the year was: Management and administration - 22 ; Aircraft crew - 14
( so a Total of 36 )
Which doesn't match the previously stated "19 full-time and 5 part-time employees including 9 aircrew" ( so a total of 24 )
Unofficial forum brauer und winzer
Not an enthusiast or a spotter
trollpikken fforwm swyddogol
User avatar
Brevet Cable

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Xm657 on Sun 10 Sep 2017, 3:20 pm

Worrying the head count doesn't seem to add up. The wider concern is if the other numbers in these account add up either.

I'm amazed they had to employ 9 aircrew. I would have thought the chance to fly and display (and barrel roll) a Vulcan would have been something to be jumped at for free or even pay VttST to do!
Xm657

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Dan O'Hagan on Sun 10 Sep 2017, 3:23 pm

Xm657 wrote:Worrying the head count doesn't seem to add up. The wider concern is if the other numbers in these account add up either.

I'm amazed they had to employ 9 aircrew. I would have thought the chance to fly and display (and barrel roll) a Vulcan would have been something to be jumped at for free or even pay VttST to do!


The fact they were paying aircrew has been common knowledge for years. Again, whether that's morally right is something that can be debated. Do, for example, B-17 Preservation pay their aircrew?
User avatar
Dan O'Hagan

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby Xm657 on Sun 10 Sep 2017, 4:20 pm

Probably a case of supply and demand. There were very few pilots eligible to fly the Vulcan - the CAA insisted they were ex RAF Vulcan trained and still active commercial or military pilots. If none of them wanted to do it for free then they would have had to be paid.

I don't think we could expect anyone to have worked for nothing to make 558 fly. Although the fact that many of the OEMs did work for free or wrote off their costs and the groups that looks after 426 and 655 do so for nothing and often out of their own pockets, makes the thought of people drawing salaries now distasteful.
Xm657

Re: Where has XH558 thread gone?

Postby aviodromefriend on Sun 10 Sep 2017, 5:33 pm

Xm657 wrote:There were very few pilots eligible to fly the Vulcan - the CAA insisted they were ex RAF Vulcan trained and still active commercial or military pilots. If none of them wanted to do it for free then they would have had to be paid.

I don't think we could expect anyone to have worked for nothing to make 558 fly. Although the fact that many of the OEMs did work for free or wrote off their costs and the groups that looks after 426 and 655 do so for nothing and often out of their own pockets, makes the thought of people drawing salaries now distasteful.
Wasn't it ordered to the trust that the aircrew had to be paid for their services by either the HLF or the CAA? I seem to remember there was something like that in one of the earlier threads about this machine. (And by removing that thread at UKAR, doesn't change how those people think about this).
A weather forecast is a forecast and just that

Mike Moses, Launch Integration Manager Space Shuttle Program
User avatar
aviodromefriend

PreviousNext

Return to Aviation Waffle

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: convair, LaurenceG and 23 guests