Originally Posted by
Kerosene Kraut
Isn't it actually far sighted to think about the typical problems and issues that will come up over and over again regardless of money invested and repairs done? For regular duty one needs reliable and safe aircraft. If you have exchanged all those parts one day it's not your grandpa's plane anymore one way or the other. So why not build a new one for daily use? I admit not 100 percent authentic but at least reliable.
Those original birds approach 100 years of age and were never meant to be flown forever.
I'm writing this because I want to see historical aircraft fly. So let's recreate them.
Hi KK!
I think that you are confusing the situation. If you really want the original machine from the past, you have to look at the inert, static, dead airframes in museums, and even 99% of them are rebuilds! However, if you wish to experience the authentic original experience of the real flying machine, you can see or fly in them at many locations in the world. The critical factors are: that the airframe is built as original and that the engine is as original. Generally, the famous and respected vintage types have to conform to a fairly limited spectrum of airframe/engine standards. Anything less becomes absurd, like the rotary engined originals with radials or, god save us, flat-fours!
Have you seen an exact Bleriot reproduction with a real rotary engine engine fly? The pilot has to be brave! The aircraft has the same limited ability as the original, because it is, the same as the original! Likewise the engine, cantankerous, noisy but, low powered and unreliable. To see such a thing at close hand, to hold it down for the engine check, to fly such a beast!
OAP