@JfromJAGs One thing we have in quantity is lawyers. We have plumbers and mechanics and doctors too because BBP has been going since about 1996 and we have followers in every profession in every corner of the world, many of whom were apprentices when we made their acquaintance and are now top of their game so any hour of the night or day we can ask a lawyer what's what so we're OK there. We also did the exercise on what would be involved in building a new boat. The T45 steel box is available as is the 2024 aluminium plate to make new spars, which would arrive pre-cut so we'd only have to rivet the parts together. The frame is in CAD and Ivanhoe Forge, the people who built our rollover jig and launch/recovery trailer, said they'll build a new one in no time flat if we need one so that's the big bits done. Swap over the sponsons, forward skins and most of its underlying structure that we built from new, the hydraulics, pneumatics, electrical and fuel systems, the great majority of which is ours. The cockpit, canopy, controls and instruments, engine and a host of other parts and we're more or less there. The doublers inside the engine and tail covers can come out as tooling to recreate those sections perfectly and all we need is a fin and a few ancillary panels and parts. It's easily achievable and in fairly short order too but the deal was we restored the wreckage and put back what was missing after which we'd operate and maintain a running boat. The museum either has to try to say that wasn't the plan - good luck with that - or argue that they missed it for a decade and a half on social media - good luck with that too. In the meantime we still have jobs to do. The left hand sponson has been rubbed down at last and we'll paint that in due course, the new start system is in-build as is the catch tank system. We need to source some pipe for the ASI next and somehow wheedle that under the main spar. There's some spanner checking to do on the front spar still then that's all to button up. Then there's the canopies to get back on with and that's before we start building everything up again. There's an engine to go in and the systems to test because we can only do so much on the bench or on rigs. We didn't move heaven and earth to build a fully working machine to let it fall into disrepair so we'll continue our work and you never know, the next letter from the RM may contain something a little more positive next time.

I've still not properly read the last open letter - I tend to skim read such things then ask the crew if there's anything new or interesting and I don't really need to do that either because if there is someone invariably flags it so it was no surprise when all I heard was essentially, there's another one. We sent a few points in reply but nothing substantive. Basically just, do you want to talk about keeping it in one piece or do you want to talk about breaking it up and we're ready to talk when you are - there really isn't much more to say than that. But today, as I was up and about early, I sat down to read it but I didn't get very far. In fact I got as far as this. 'Consequentially the Ruskin Museum will not permit Mr. Smith and/or BBP to ever run Bluebird K7 again upon the water and will enforce that decision through the courts if there is any attempt to do so during the time it takes from the date of this letter, until our property Bluebird K7, is taken out of possession of Mr. Smith and/or BBP and handed over to its owners the Ruskin Museum. ' Now I know I'm biased and possibly not seeing this with the clarity others may enjoy so please correct me if I'm wrong but does that not read as just pure, foot-stamping, take my ball and go home huffiness? What's more disturbing, though, is the consequence it seeks to bring about. It appears aimed at spoiling our fun, an attempt to injure BBP but the reality is that we put K7 back on the water after 51 years, got her working and had a great time doing it. We've been there, done it and (literally) have the tee shirts and no one can ever take that off us so if K7 never runs again, to us at least, so be it because we were there. But what they appear to be saying is, in order to spite BBP, we will make sure that none of you will have the pleasure of seeing K7 run. Yes, there's all this talk of how they plan to run it once their new team has put it all back together again but we've done both and even if they sent their team in today to start breaking up K7 they'd be facing an absolutely monumental task - we know because we've done that too and many of the tee shirts are long since binned after that effort. Then there's the fact that all they had to do in 2019 was sort out the parking and running on Coniston was in the bag and you saw what happened there so based on long experience we're not overly optimistic. We'd be a long way ahead of them with a new boat but then you wouldn't be watching the same machine that ran on Bute. No doubt we'd inspire a whole new audience with another build because it's 21 years this year since we lifted the wreckage and our new team members would get hands on with some of the exciting tasks they missed last time but it's the long way around for no good reason. I've long since stepped away from the negotiating position to go back to my Group-B rally cars, the other guys are more than capable, so surely it's about time that whoever thought publishing the above in an open letter takes a step back too and let the someone else sort it out. PS - if whoever writes those open letters is reading this, it's only a small thing but detail is important, 'K7' should be in italics as it's the name of a vessel.

You're unlikely to get anything constructive out of him and to suggest his input be placed in a thread for trolls and children is doing children a disservice. An exceptionally poor ambassador for the Campbells.

@Filtertron you would imagine, would you not, that the CFHT would be pushing for the best outcome for their legacy and the public's enjoyment thereof.

Not sure Brian was thinking railway locomotives, somehow. Maybe he'll explain. How about it, Brian? Who or what is the Great Gatherer?

I thought I was missing something. I even Googled 'The Great Gatherer' but even Google was baffled. And who got their knuckles rapped? Many questions. It's neither insulting nor informative, it's just peculiar.

Anyone got a clue what he's on about?

He's tried that a few times but he's just too easy to spot.

No need for popcorn. It really isn't that interesting but speaking to Peter today it appears that his questions to the RM have again gone unanswered so we may have to pursue that one.

Care to elaborate? Explain the smoke and mirrors suggestion, perhaps? Outline what you feel is rubbish so we can see where you're coming from. Otherwise you may as well say, the earth is flat, then run off.

But it isn't bullshit at all. It's a very fair assessment. Cerberus has also clearly taken the time to understand what's what too. We did go a fair way down the road of enforcing the original version of the 2013 agreement but after several conferences, Counsel basically said, why do you want to spend money giving away more than you need to? Let them come to you. Fair enough. Nor is there any chance of a brace of brainless trolls having the slightest influence. When we're not laughing at them we're ignoring them. As for a lengthy stalemate, well it isn't really because we're now getting on with some of the work needed to finish the rebuild and that has always had a big following so we're getting back to business as usual there and we'll get the doors open soon as the worst of the winter is behind us and grow the visitor experience as that was something we began working on last summer and that was very exciting. After all, our little Bluebird Wing is about the same size it's just we've got it full of stuff - soon clear that out. Our corner of the world was really beginning to become a little local tourist attraction with Debs' shop doing a roaring trade only this time we'll reinstall an engine and put on a proper show. There's lots to look forward to while we wait for common sense to prevail and at the end of the day the only loser is the RM. We're doing what we love, anyone who wants to come and visit K7 is welcome with the added bonus that you get to meet the team and have an expert on hand to answer questions and we'll be at complete readiness to go back to the water soon as everything is settled. What's not to like?

It doesn't need goodwill, it needs professionalism. We've all worked with people we wouldn't necessarily get along with but it's easy enough to do. As for stepping back, I've been leaving the negotiations to the rest of the crew for some time now. Since 2019, in fact. Remember it was Peter and Jordan who put together the Zoom meeting - I had nothing to do with that. Then another well-meaning individual stepped up with an offer of independent brokerage and that person was immediately passed to Peter, who you will recall, also asked all the right questions of the museum when they tried to claim that it was us who had failed to come to the table having turned down the 90 day offer. Once again I stayed well out of proceedings there. I did the RAC thing but that was because Neil asked me if I would and as Neil is a top bloke I was happy to oblige but otherwise I'm out of it and happy working on the Group-B rally cars that I put down 20 years ago to try my hand at a wrecked boat. Let others do the negotiating from here. What some probably won't like, though, is that our team knows exactly what has to be delivered so no matter which of us does the negotiating nothing will be significantly different. Yes, the words used might be different and the individual delivering them will be whoever steps up on the day but the message remains unaltered. And as for all this 'let the courts decide' nonsense... I'm yet to see an offering on that matter from anyone who appears to have the slightest inkling of what that involves. Who is going to issue proceedings and for what? The RM can say we're not giving them their bits back and we'll be right back at them for trying to wriggle free of what they very publicly agreed with us and we'll all be locked into a five year legal wrangle that will cost half a million quid with the trustees having refused to mediate and therefore potentially exposing themselves to personal liability in the event of an adverse costs order. And that's without their obligation to the Charities Commission to stay away from litigation unless all other options have been explored and exhausted. Obviously there are still a great many unexplored options remaining. And the first thing a court would do anyway is adjourn for a while and 'suggest' we have a mediation, which under those conditions will be expensive when the opportunity to do it on the cheap is right under everyone's noses. And how do I know this? Because I spent eight years locked into High Court civil litigation in two separate cases in which I was named as Respondent. Both were baseless and the first was abandoned outright and I was awarded 100% costs, something my legal team had never seen before, and the second was settled for pennies in the pound at mediation because the claimant realised very late in the day that they were throwing good money after bad. I've been there, seen it, done it and the tee shirt probably went to be used as dusters years ago. It's brutal and draining and unhealthy in the extreme but a very exciting challenge at the same time. And that's only civil court because in two previous lives I have also testified as an expert in the Crown Court in the fields of vehicle security and underwater exploration. Go to court? Let's do it.

@JfromJAGs That meeting was put together by Magneto Magazine following an article they published. It was a one-off.

@Lesley Edkins Neither, it was donated to the Bluebird Project so it stays with Bluebird Project. It could go to Coniston but the museum expect it to become theirs to do with as they please when we would in fact be loaning them our material for display. We have offered to work with them to make this possible but they refuse to engage and have instead requested that their parts be removed. It's a crazy way to behave but it's what they've chosen so we'll return their material and replace the missing parts so we once again have a working Bluebird.

There's no reason it can't be repeated. We just need to build some new hardware, is all.

I'm not sure what you mean by individuals or personally but there is a sizeable team at the Bluebird Project plus our families and sponsors. As for making a fortune, the BBP is strictly not for profit and has cost us all a small fortune over the years but then you did say you knew nothing of the back story. It's worth a read. Have a look at Bluebirdproject.com

We know from long experience that the whole Bluebird thing is a very niche interest. We post a video of us cleaning a switch inside a Vulcan and it gets a zillion views in moments. Post a video of Bluebird running and it gets a few hundred. Exciting though it is, it only has a relatively small number of enthusiasts. Of course it's very different when we were out on the water because all you had to do was get there and there was something to see but on a day to day basis it's a small thing and it has never generated anything like the sort of interest or income to buy expensive things. Creating sponsons, and that means sponsons of the correct standard to run on them, safely was a huge undertaking. They are boats in their own right at 12ft long each and they have over 200 parts in each of them. The cost of making those alone would be a healthy six figures and they won't be built quickly either. So then what do you say to the people who you would have help you? We were offered a pair of perfect sponsons, tried and tested and already built, but we didn't fancy those ones so will you help us build another pair? Then there's the rest of the structure to put to rights, then there's the engine, pneumatics, hydraulics, electrical system and instrumentation. They'll need a new launching dolly and all the ground support kit, compressors, safety boats, etc. It's all been done but having blown out that opportunity in such a ludicrous and public manner the pool of people and organisations ready to offer assistance just got smaller. They are going to need a big pot of money and it won't come from donations, that's for sure so let's hope someone has deep pockets.

@Engine 711 Ban him? But he's the gift that just keeps on giving. Imagine if someone said, I know a way to install a barely literate cabbage salesman as an ambassador to the RM and the Campbell family such that every time he opens his mouth he makes them all look stupid we'd go for that. If they turn into the Norwoods again we'll look at it.

"Yes, I thought the comments about Name Calling was very ironic." What's doubly ironic is that all we've done of late is set the record straight. A supposedly responsible charity and museum would have had you believe recently that the full extent of the 2013 agreement was a couple of emails between the curator and ourselves that she didn't even have the authority to send or that the meeting of 5th November might've gone somewhere but for our unpreparedness. That the 2013 agreement went right to the to of the same trustees who made our meeting a farce was to be firmly hushed up so if we correct things with appropriate evidence is that name calling? And if severely diluted half-truths are told about us in a deliberate attempt to mislead the public is that name calling? If so then we'll take that but at least ours is honest name calling.

"Interesting to note Jeff Carroll's comments about name calling etc. Could it be that they're out of pure frustration due to the museum's complete refusal to engage with the BBP and find a compromise that suits everyone?" Interesting to note also that the snippet in question appears to be from the same interview as was conducted when the first press release went out. You know the one that outwardly said - with deep regret and much sorrow we're once again exercising our shocking sense of entitlement now the hard work is done whilst behind closed doors it said, give us the lot and leave with bugger-all despite what we promised you and, by the way, don't tell the public because they'll murder us. That press release, remember? By the way that press release said there would be no further comment leaving the news media unable to tell both sides as they would wish. They quite rightly want a comment from both sides so hiding from reporters is very unprofessional. Now I could have this all wrong and maybe Jeff does all his media appearances from his gaming chair via a fuzzy webcam but it was a fairly quiet news day and the Beeb were making something of it starting the day before. We were worth a Proper reporter and a cameraman so they'll have had a video journalist in Cumbria who would have wanted a nice shot down by the lake or by Campbell's grave or somewhere like that so that leaves but two possibilities. Either the default position for talking to the media is the fuzzy webcam and gaming chair or that snippet came from the earlier interview and no one was made available for comment on the last occasion. The point being that name calling is the term they use to describe criticism but when they go about their media relations in such a manner they're going to make themselves look stupid so they'll take criticism and that becomes name calling. Time to look closer to home.