Engineering Director

[Wedgy]

....can you elaborate on this 'unresolved issue' you are having with Mr Edmondson?

Management training from the Regional Manager at Wernham Hogg?























... I'm going to staple my mouth shut now

[Xplumberlives]

I think the important thing is to get the relavant info posted up there, and get the rest of the details up-to-date. People can then make their own reasoned judgements.

I've also called for there to be something similar to the 'wall of fame' for people who've been involved in the project in the past who seem to have just been erased from history.

Has anything happened yet with regard to getting the missing details in to the public domain?

[Mayfly]

I think the important thing is to get the relavant info posted up there, and get the rest of the details up-to-date. People can then make their own reasoned judgements.

I've also called for there to be something similar to the 'wall of fame' for people who've been involved in the project in the past who seem to have just been erased from history.

Has anything happened yet with regard to getting the missing details in to the public domain?

Unfortunately it's the lack of attention to details like this that gives a bad impression.

[PhantomAviator]

I think the important thing is to get the relavant info posted up there, and get the rest of the details up-to-date. People can then make their own reasoned judgements.

I've also called for there to be something similar to the 'wall of fame' for people who've been involved in the project in the past who seem to have just been erased from history.

Has anything happened yet with regard to getting the missing details in to the public domain?

Unfortunately it's the lack of attention to details like this that gives a bad impression.

Once again something that was pointed out over 2 years ago and was going to be corrected ASAP.

And before someone jumps in with well no-one informed me I had email correspondence regarding this, i provided my details and details of other people who had vanished from the About Us/Operating Company on the TVOC web site.
I even had an acknowledgment email saying that it was in the process of being corrected, the only thing that seemed to happen then was that if you click on the About Us/Operating Company the next heading for the details is The Trust.

So we gave up asking them in the end.

[Xplumberlives]

I am NOT really surprised!

[Dan4th]

Well, it seems to me that someone might
pose this question on the other side and
see what happens, although deletion of the
post wouldn't surprise me.....

D.

[Mayfly]

The trouble is everyone blames everyone else for it not being done - I know the aircrew details 4 years ago took 18 months to be uploaded because I took the photos especially for it. - I have no idea who has access to update the 'About Us' feature.

[Dan4th]

Well, does Paul Spann still do all that?

Or is it someone else now.....

D.

[Gully]

Still Paul Spann. However, he can only update what he's given...

Gully

[Xplumberlives]

Déjà vu!
C'est la vie!

[Nickolas]

Déjà vu!
C'est la vie!

I'll have a pint of that too.

[Dan4th]

Well, there's also Presque Vu where you
have this earth-shattering insight about
what "it" all means but don't quite get there.

And then there's Jamais Vu in which things
which you're very familiar with suddenly
seem totally foreign.

I get #2 every morning when I look in the mirror......

Danf.

[PiperArrow28]

Folks,

Just to try and explain here....

Providing all is well, with the project/business moving onwards, there are plans to radically change the website as a celebration of XH558's 50th Birthday on 25th May. You can witness some of the "fresh" new look by the Appeal and Web Store pages already active. These themselves have taken a fair amount of time and money.

At the moment. all changes have to be authorised and directed to ISSL, who quite rightly charge commercial rates for the work. Paul Spann has very generously given plenty of his own time in the past, and still very much supports us as best he can, but he also has fellow directors to report to.

In light of that, your money is being spent wisely on the "important" areas needed now to attract the support in on-going fund-raising. All other areas will be addressed when and if the changes go ahead later in the year.

It is not now worth "tinkering" when a full blown alternative might be here very soon.
That is all down to how the Appeal goes over the next few weeks.

P.S. I have had instruction to alter the SPONSORSHIP side of things, so are working on better links to create visibility to our corporate supporters.

Regards,
Ian.

[Xplumberlives]

So Ian if the PROJECT/BUSINESS gains enough funding we may get the details we have sought for some time!

[PiperArrow28]

Correct.
Remember, I have only been actively involved in the web site development over the last few months, so can't comment on anything before that.

Rest assured, it is high on my agenda, so long as it remains operational beyond March.

Regards,
Ian.

[Xplumberlives]

Thank you

[Dlwbrunty]

I am told person was an erk in the RAF. This would exemplify his attitude [heresay].
What galls me is that I am sure they know this site exists and they cannot be bothered to read these threads: or think they are above them!!!!!
Unfortunetly we have no option [earlier post from another party re caa stuff] but to tolerate their incompetance.
It saddens me alot.

[P.eames]

Why would they partake? So called aviation enthusiast fora have pretty much shot themselves in the foot when it comes to credibility with some of the nonsense posted, as Pat says elsewhere a lot of it is simply people with grudges with wood cutting tools to grind.

[Jigsaw]

That is not the case for all though is it?

I for one do not get involved in mud slinging.

Some people just require answers to genuine questions. I don't see that as shooting oneself in the foot.
Remember,the vast majority of these people have put a lot of their own hard earned cash forward.

After all is said and done, most just want the end result of a flying Vulcan.

The others? They are as entitled to a view as everybody else.
Respond to them and fuel the fire or sit back and let it go over your head.
Think of the bigger picture and let them get on with it.

[Mayfly]

I[color=#0040BF]I am told person was an erk in the RAF. This would exemplify his attitude [heresay].
What galls me is that I am sure they know this site exists and they cannot be bothered to read these threads: or think they are above them!!!!!
Unfortunetly we have no option [earlier post from another party re caa stuff] but to tolerate their incompetance.
It saddens me alot.[/color]

I take exception to that remark, I was an erk as you put it!! please don't make sweeping statements.............

[PhantomAviator]

I[color=#0040BF]I am told person was an erk in the RAF. This would exemplify his attitude [heresay].
What galls me is that I am sure they know this site exists and they cannot be bothered to read these threads: or think they are above them!!!!!
Unfortunetly we have no option [earlier post from another party re caa stuff] but to tolerate their incompetance.
It saddens me alot.[/color]

I take exception to that remark, I was an erk as you put it!! please don't make sweeping statements.............

erk [ urk ] (plural erks)
noun U.K.
Definition:
1. air force low-ranking member of RAF: an aircraftman or -woman or other low-ranking member of the Royal Air Force
2. navy seaman: a navy seaman

[Early 20th century. Origin ?]

Erk
meaning Slave

This weeks word is another word for slave, flunky, or drudge. 'Erk' is thought to have originated as an abbreviation of 'aircraftman' which is the lowest rank in the British Royal Air Force. It is also used in the navy to describe a seaman (again the lowest rank available). This is British slang and was first used in the early 20th century.

But the sweeping statement, I thought that was for TAG's.

[P.eames]

That is not the case for all though is it?

I for one do not get involved in mud slinging.

Some people just require answers to genuine questions. I don't see that as shooting oneself in the foot.
Remember,the vast majority of these people have put a lot of their own hard earned cash forward.

After all is said and done, most just want the end result of a flying Vulcan.

The others? They are as entitled to a view as everybody else.
Respond to them and fuel the fire or sit back and let it go over your head.
Think of the bigger picture and let them get on with it.

No you're right it isn't, but it is enough to make trying to respond a waste of time and this survey on UKAr suggests the majority is no where near vast.http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19714

it isn't the opinions that cause the problem but the rubbish rumor and speculation, one recently was that the chief pilot was making £100k a year and despite repeated attempts to tell him he was wrong he didn't listen.

[Smiler]

For some reason some of us have been going through and updating CV's and I happen to catch a glimse of Andrew's and have authority from him to post some extracts as follows:

Work Experience

Vulcan to the Sky Trust (previously C Walton Ltd) Sept 1999 – Mar 2002 and Apr 2005 – present
Project Engineering Manager
Engineering Director – June 2007.

Alstec Group Mar 2002 – Apr 2005
Business partner in project management, engineering and technology.
Deputy Site Manager JET (Joint Euorpean Torous): May 04 – Apr 05

Senior Engineer, BAA’s Heathrow Terminal 1 baggage extension project: Mar 02 – May 04

Cromwell Mowers Sept 1997 – Sept 1999
General Manager

Arden Direct Marketing Feb 1995 – Sept 1997
Production Manager

Royal Air Force Nov 1987 – Feb 1993

Qualifications

• Nebosh General Certificate in Occupational Safety & Health: 2006.
• Institute of Safety and Health (IOSH): 2003.
• Classified Radiation Level: 2003.
• Fundamentals in Project and Quality Management (Skillset): 2000.
• Business Management NVQ Level 4: 1994.
• Small Business Management (East London University): 1994.
• Business Management and Accountancy (Nottingham University): 1993.
• City and Guilds Aeronautical Engineering Parts 1, 2 and 3. 1993
• HND Aeronautics - 1990.

[Xplumberlives]

Thank you Smiler

[Mayfly]

That is not the case for all though is it?

I for one do not get involved in mud slinging.

Some people just require answers to genuine questions. I don't see that as shooting oneself in the foot.
Remember,the vast majority of these people have put a lot of their own hard earned cash forward.

After all is said and done, most just want the end result of a flying Vulcan.

The others? They are as entitled to a view as everybody else.
Respond to them and fuel the fire or sit back and let it go over your head.
Think of the bigger picture and let them get on with it.

No you're right it isn't, but it is enough to make trying to respond a waste of time and this survey on UKAr suggests the majority is no where near vast.http://forums.airshows.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19714

it isn't the opinions that cause the problem but the rubbish rumor and speculation, one recently was that the chief pilot was making £100k a year and despite repeated attempts to tell him he was wrong he didn't listen.

I have my own views of those who made those accusations, but I am far too polite to post it in public!!!