Looking like the Beverley is in dire straits AGAIN

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

17 years 5 months

Posts: 8,980

See

 

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/people/blackburn-beverley-iconic-a…

Original post

Member for

16 years 6 months

Posts: 1,327

As far as I remember the original plan was to turn it into an air bnb. From memory I think that included disposing of the engines and other modifications so it appeared that comparatively little of the Beverley would be left in which case it isn't really surprising that few want to contribute to transport and reassembly costs.
 If there was an attempt to raise funds for transport and reassembly as an exhibit at Elvington that might persuade more people to contribute but unfortunately when everyone's finances are being stretched it isn't the best time to be asking for donations. 
 I must admit I was sceptical about the conversion to an air bnb in the first place. The inside of the Southend Beverley wasn't the most pleasant place to be on a hot day and after the museum closed there was a plan to turn the Southend aircraft into a restaurant which foundered on health and safety grounds even in those days.  

     

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 5,088

Also, Elvington have already declined the aircraft for very good reasons.

Member for

16 years 6 months

Posts: 1,327

Elvington said they declined because it was beyond their resources. That could well mean that they simply don't have the money or manpower to undertake reassembly.
If the costs of reassembly were met by contributions they may change their minds BUT ideally the Beverley needs to be inside to prevent any further deterioration and I don't know if Elvington (or any other museum) has the hangar space available for indoor display.  

There was a time when we had two Beverleys in preservation and a third outside the RAF Museum (which the museum didn't own) and now the future for the sole survivor doesn't look great.  

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 5,088

Elvington lacks the money, manpower, space, and certainly the hangarage!

This is like the XH558 petition last week, campaigning to get the Vulcan up to us. 

Did anyone stop to ask if we actually wanted or could take it..?

Member for

4 years 5 months

Posts: 373

No one ever asks the people that really count, they just assume that their idea(s) will be met with open arms and  bottomless pockets!

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 5,088

T/O.... nail, head...

Elvington, like any museum, is coming out of the very uncertain times. This, combined with the fact that having viewed it during the disposal auction means we are well aware of the (potentially very costly) issues the aircraft has, means taking the Bev just is not a practicable proposition for YAM.

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 1,907

"Everybody has an opinion, but if you are not prepared to help financially you have no right to pass comment.

"If we don't get the funding there's two options, to chop it up or leave it where it is. It's a shame, I think it's fantastic, such a monster."

In terms of how much time the aircraft may have left depends on the owner of Fort Paull and how long he is prepared to let them keep the aircraft there.

I think anyone and everyone has a right to pass comment on this one, as I recall, the purchaser outbid other interested "museum" parties at the time, claimed to have the resources to do the job (but instead has a benefactor who is willing to fund its relocation).

It seems now the bidder has realised its beyond him (and seemingly always was) and wants crowd funding to come to his reputational rescue or for museum to step in at the last minute and get him off the hook, so far he is removed and sold off the engines, and dismantled much of it in-situ, otherwise he has likely contributed nothing other than twarting a more viable acquisition occuring back prior to Covid by a bone-fide museum. 

Member for

16 years 6 months

Posts: 1,327

I didn't automatically assume that Elvington would take the Beverley.

My post actually said 

 "Elvington said they declined because it was beyond their resources. That could well mean that they simply don't have the money or manpower to undertake reassembly.
If the costs of reassembly were met by contributions they may change their minds"

 Having been involved with the Southend museum when I was younger I am well aware of the corrosion problems that are likely to be encountered with an aircarft that has been outside for so long. The Southend Beverley actually had a large fatigue crack in he fuselage just ahead of the tailplane caused by the wind blowing the fins around over the years and I was told by someone involved in the scrapping that there was massive corrosion in the main spar. The centre of the undercarriage bogies had also completely dissolved due to delamination of the casting and if viewed from above there was just an outside frame from the casting with the axles passing through it. It was a miracle that the bogies hadn't collapsed completely.

 The corrosion on the Beverley and the CASA 2111 at Southend was attributed to salt air corrosion even though the museum was probably between 5 and 8 miles inland from the coast. Bearing in mind that XB259 has been kept on the coast for a long time it is likely that the corrosion is even worse than the Southend example unless the airframe has been treated with corrosion inhibitor over the years.

 I would love to see the Beverley saved and If there was a proper proposal to move the aircraft to somewhere that had the facilities and finances to undertake restoration and then display her I would gladly donate a few pounds as that is all I can afford. Realistically this is unlikely to happen and the loss of the engines has made the project even less attractive so the future doesn't look great.  

 Mark - If I remember rightly you were involved in acquiring the surviving sections of the Southend Lincoln which was a prime example of a complete but neglected aeroplane that went through several owners and was gradually parted out for spares mainly because no one wanted a complete Avro Lincoln (particularly a much modified one with a Lancaster cockpit). Unfortunately for the aeroplane it was worth more as parts than it was as a complete airframe but hopefully the surviving sections will make a useful contribution to a restoration in Australia.      

            

Member for

4 years 5 months

Posts: 373

WJ244 my post above: "No one ever asks the people that really count, they just assume that their idea(s) will be met with open arms and  bottomless pockets!", wasn't aimed at you specifically, but the wider 'aviation' community.

On behalf of Newark Air Museum I have personally responded to six exasperated emails, where I had to explain why NAM couldn't consider taking the For Paull, Beverley.

One emailer in particular sticks in my mind as they became quite angry during the communications, which were littered with wild assumptions, and quite frankly a basic lack of understanding.

Just looking after the cockpit from XB261 presents logistical challenges, as it occupies a fair amount of floor space

Member for

16 years 7 months

Posts: 5,927

Whilst this is not meant as a criticism of anyone who has posted on this thread, to paraphrase George Bernard Shaw:

Those who can, do; those who can't, complain.

Absent a miracle or a very rich benefactor, neither of which appear to be in prospect or to be likely, I fear that the reality will be that the Beverley soon will join the Passenger Pigeon, the Great Auk and the Dodo.

Member for

16 years 6 months

Posts: 1,327

 Apologies for the misunderstanding.

 I can appreciate that the cost and work involved in moving any large aircraft is horrendous and obviously there is the follow on costs of restoration and future maintenance which is a never ending task on aircraft which are kept outside. Some just don't understand that it isn't simply a case of moving and reassembling the aircraft and then leaving it on a hardstanding to be admired by visitors. It is all too easy for a large airframe to become a millstone around the owners neck.
 When the RAF disposed of the remaining Vulcans some were bought by optimists who had the best of intentions but over time just couldn't fight the effects of the weather and had to call in the scrapman.

 Museums only have limited funds and resources and modern policy appears to be to acquire mostly airframes which can be kept inside once they have been restored because that is the best way of guaranteeing their preservation for future generations.  
 I take my hat off to groups like Newark, Duxford Aviation Society, Midland Air Museum and others who continue to battle against the weather to maintain large aircraft outside but there is only so much that anyone can take on before it becomes impossible to keep up with the inevitable decay so it is inevitable that some airframes, such as the Beverley, won't survive.       .   

 Incidentally, as a teenager I worked with the engineering staff and as an attendant at Southend during school holidays as well as being a volunteer and spent many days in the cockpit of XB261 making sure that no one damaged it. Later it was left open without an attendant and suffered badly at the hands of vandals as did Anson G-AGPG.           

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 5,088

Even with the transport costs etc covered, it's still a no go. From memory there's lots to rectify on the aircraft, for example the main supports in the cabin floor have gone very 'furry', there was a lot of corrosion evident on the skins (particularly the underside of the boom and the undercarriage 'trousers'), and most worryingly the severely delaminated starboard main bogie and the cracked nosewheel castings. These would all take more money and manpower than we can spare. Also, we just don't physically have the space on site... 

Member for

9 years 4 months

Posts: 30

So there are two options from the comments here - it gets scrapped or it gets preserved with some investment by way of two trajectories.

If this plane is to be cut up for scrap then the second option is to cut it into manageable sections for storage until enough interest/investment is available to put it back together again.

By manageable sections then I mean cut up into sections that can fit on a 7 1/2 ton flatbed or trailer.

I would imagine that had someone followed this line of thinking when Stirling's were being scrapped then we would have been very grateful to them.

It may not be the ideal solution but it is probably the best option when interest in the preservation of a last survivor cannot find the necessary investment needed to dismantle it properly.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,893

When it's put back together where?

There is no available hangar, or likely to be one, anywhere near large enough for a beast the size of a Beverley.

If it's stored with the intention of reassembling it sometime, it would merely be delaying the inevitable.

Member for

9 years 4 months

Posts: 30

That is for future generations to decide my friend. No one in this generation seems to have the resources to do so.

That was the thrust of my suggestion!

Member for

4 years 5 months

Posts: 373

My understanding (happy to be corrected) is that it was cut to move it Fort Paull; the subsequent lack of original structural integrity is one of the reasons why its fate is so uncertain.

Building on dhfan's comments, who would pay for any undercover storage, or indeed which location has the space to provide any outdoor storage?

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 2,893

The Beverley is 162 ft span and nearly 40 feet high.

A colossal hangar is never going to miraculously appear and as TwinOtter says, even outdoors needs a huge amount of space.

Member for

4 years 5 months

Posts: 373

The attached photo from the Newark Air Museum was taken in 1977 when the museum (in my personal view) sensibly declined the chance of trying to rescue XL149 at the unofficial Reserve Store at RAF Finningley - it gives you an idea of the aircraft size!

All that was saved is the cockpit, which is now on show in Doncaster.

The photo was scanned up in January 2020, when everyone was trying to 'give' the Fort Paull aircraft to Newark - again sense prevailed and the museum declined the chance of pursuing the aircraft.

Attachments

Member for

16 years 7 months

Posts: 5,927

Did anyone preserve the Austin Maxi? As a car, it was about as appealing as the Beverly was an aeroplane!

Member for

4 years 5 months

Posts: 373

I don't think so, it's a good job it wasn't his previous Maxi, which was a horrible sand/tan colour, which would have really blended in with XL149.

For context, the photograph was taken around the time that Newark Air Museum saved Shackleton WR977  from the scrapman, also at the same RAF Finningley location!