Why None Of These Flying ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: back at the grind stone
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why None Of These Flying ?
With all the great historic british machines gracing our skies and airshows. Why have certain ones been left out or are poorly represented, while others are found in multiples, even with the same operator / group.
Are there an airworthyness issues involved or are we all just fixated with spitfires etc.
Ones that spring to mind:
Fairly Gannet, what a monster and an airworthy T5 is for sale in the US, plus I heard someone did look at restoring a AEW one at Sandtoft ?? What happended.
PB Deffiant. Is there one still under restoration to fly ??
Mozzy: Has no one any interest in getting one flying again. I remember seeing a almost complete advanced project for sale in Canada ??
Anyone care to add some more??
Are there an airworthyness issues involved or are we all just fixated with spitfires etc.
Ones that spring to mind:
Fairly Gannet, what a monster and an airworthy T5 is for sale in the US, plus I heard someone did look at restoring a AEW one at Sandtoft ?? What happended.
PB Deffiant. Is there one still under restoration to fly ??
Mozzy: Has no one any interest in getting one flying again. I remember seeing a almost complete advanced project for sale in Canada ??
Anyone care to add some more??
Four reasons I think
(1) It takes a lot of work to gain initial approval of a type, but once one of a type is approved, everybody else can jump on the bandwagon.
(2) It takes a lot of money
(3) There are very few Engineers in this country with the ability and authorisation to "recommend" to CAA that an aeroplane, new to the civil register, should be allowed to fly.
(4) Spares supplies vary enormously depending upon type, age and how it was retired from service by the military.
G
(1) It takes a lot of work to gain initial approval of a type, but once one of a type is approved, everybody else can jump on the bandwagon.
(2) It takes a lot of money
(3) There are very few Engineers in this country with the ability and authorisation to "recommend" to CAA that an aeroplane, new to the civil register, should be allowed to fly.
(4) Spares supplies vary enormously depending upon type, age and how it was retired from service by the military.
G
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,616
Received 291 Likes
on
159 Posts
There's only one Defiant left in the RAF museum, though I think a couple of non-airworthy replcias are under way wiht some original parts...
There was a flying Gannet on the UK reg, not sure where it is now...
Over and out, my pint's getting warm...
There was a flying Gannet on the UK reg, not sure where it is now...
Over and out, my pint's getting warm...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: back at the grind stone
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My question was aimed at the types that don't have technical issues. Such as the Javelin, who has enough trouble technically getting airborne in its service days let alone now.
It is after seeing how much support and hard cash has been raised for the Vulcan in the hope of getting it airbourne, with no firm plan (if it's really lottery of bust, why wasn't I told that before stumping up £ 50-00). when for a fraction of that money we could have a Gannet or such others, not currently flying and not subject to complex technical issues, in our skies again.
Yes the Gannet was operated on a civvy reg on the late eighties, that one is at Sandtoft, where it will rot away like everything else there, Vampires, Provosts (piston), Meteor and B25.
While the like of the BBMF have 7 spitfires, but no mozzy, lysander etc and the RNHF have 3 stringbags, but no Gannet, Fury or Sea Hawk ?, Sycamore, Wessex.
When examples of all these, are out there waiting support and cash to get unique examples flying again.
So how about trading a spit for the Canada mozzy ? Or do they need all 7 to keep the British public reminded that the spitfire won the war sinlge handed.
It is after seeing how much support and hard cash has been raised for the Vulcan in the hope of getting it airbourne, with no firm plan (if it's really lottery of bust, why wasn't I told that before stumping up £ 50-00). when for a fraction of that money we could have a Gannet or such others, not currently flying and not subject to complex technical issues, in our skies again.
Yes the Gannet was operated on a civvy reg on the late eighties, that one is at Sandtoft, where it will rot away like everything else there, Vampires, Provosts (piston), Meteor and B25.
While the like of the BBMF have 7 spitfires, but no mozzy, lysander etc and the RNHF have 3 stringbags, but no Gannet, Fury or Sea Hawk ?, Sycamore, Wessex.
When examples of all these, are out there waiting support and cash to get unique examples flying again.
So how about trading a spit for the Canada mozzy ? Or do they need all 7 to keep the British public reminded that the spitfire won the war sinlge handed.
The RNHF have the three Stringbags as they each represent the different variants that served with the Fleet Air Arm; the Mk.I (W5856) II (LS326) and III (NF389).
They do of course have a Sea Fury and Sea Hawk, though both under repair at the moment.
In the 1980's The Royal Navy had a few Gannets in store for possible use with the RNHF, as well as a Harvard.
Unfortunately when the Navy pulled out of financing the Flight they had to be sold to raise much needed finance.
In fact XT752, the Gannet up for sale in the US was one of those aircraft.
They do of course have a Sea Fury and Sea Hawk, though both under repair at the moment.
In the 1980's The Royal Navy had a few Gannets in store for possible use with the RNHF, as well as a Harvard.
Unfortunately when the Navy pulled out of financing the Flight they had to be sold to raise much needed finance.
In fact XT752, the Gannet up for sale in the US was one of those aircraft.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Various
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Gannet in question?
http://www.courtesyaircraft.com/n752XT.htm
Pretty interesting price. Wonder if it's in shape for a pond crossing?
http://www.courtesyaircraft.com/n752XT.htm
Pretty interesting price. Wonder if it's in shape for a pond crossing?
Halifax, preferably the Hali III.
Realistically though, I'm looking forward to seeing a few Ansons, and the Duxford Beaufighter take to the air again. Agreed with the point above re BoBMF Spitsto a certain extent although it is nice to see the difference between the different marks. Maybe a few (pun not intended) could be sacrified to finance a Mossie rebuild.
PS When are they going to realise that there were no Dakotas or Lancasters in the BoB? Overdue for a name change methinks.
Realistically though, I'm looking forward to seeing a few Ansons, and the Duxford Beaufighter take to the air again. Agreed with the point above re BoBMF Spitsto a certain extent although it is nice to see the difference between the different marks. Maybe a few (pun not intended) could be sacrified to finance a Mossie rebuild.
PS When are they going to realise that there were no Dakotas or Lancasters in the BoB? Overdue for a name change methinks.
It's a more complex system than hours, used by a number of military aircraft - basically it's measured by an internal device which takes into account the "severity" of useage. It's more realistic in terms of component life and maintenance scheduling.
G
G
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: back at the grind stone
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That T5 Gannet in the states look temptong doesn't it. Low hour airframe and good engine times.
I must admit I don't know exactly what the engine setup is. What is a Double Mamba engine, and who thought of that name for it ??
I must admit I don't know exactly what the engine setup is. What is a Double Mamba engine, and who thought of that name for it ??
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A broad thread.
The interest in Spitfires seems to be exponentially greater than any other aircraft; the BBMF are locked in a vicious cycle, and it's not their fault. At least they are preserving them! At one stage they were the only Hurricane operators in the world. That, at least is much better, and (quite an achievement) they are still operating 2 Hurris.
Defiant. One survivor, nailed to the ground by the RAF Museum. Missing the underside outer wing bolts and the tyres have no inner tubes. One 'full scale model' by the Boulton Paul Society in Wolves. Nice, but not a flyer!
Let's say you get the Defiant off the RAF Museum and under rebuild to fly. These days you can, with a lot of money go get P-51, Spitfire, Harvard (etc) parts from the nice suppliers, and the paperwork is not all 'new type'. The Defiant will all be new and nothing will be off the shelf. Think, it's a Merlin, but the coolant setup, fuel supply etc, while not really hard to redo, will be a one off...
If I recall correctly, the Canadian Mozzie project by the Zaleskys was good, but expensive. Projects are generally. There is one Mozzie being restored to fly in British Columbia, and a series new build production in N.Z. by a retired yacht designer builder. There's speculation about the Flighter Collection's example. Bigger = much more expensive + difficult.
Richard Melton has a Walrus kit for restoration, avaliable for sale. It's unique (only three other grounded survivors) but no-one's bought it. I'd love to see it fly, but those with money are apparently not bothered!
The LAST Blackburn Beverley is under threat of scapping at the closed Museum of Army Transport - despite interest and effort by some enthusiasts, led by the Yorkshire Air Museum, many enthusiasts have taken a 'so what' or 'it's big, difficult and I can't see the point' attitude.
Hope this adds a bit...
Cheers
James
The interest in Spitfires seems to be exponentially greater than any other aircraft; the BBMF are locked in a vicious cycle, and it's not their fault. At least they are preserving them! At one stage they were the only Hurricane operators in the world. That, at least is much better, and (quite an achievement) they are still operating 2 Hurris.
Defiant. One survivor, nailed to the ground by the RAF Museum. Missing the underside outer wing bolts and the tyres have no inner tubes. One 'full scale model' by the Boulton Paul Society in Wolves. Nice, but not a flyer!
Let's say you get the Defiant off the RAF Museum and under rebuild to fly. These days you can, with a lot of money go get P-51, Spitfire, Harvard (etc) parts from the nice suppliers, and the paperwork is not all 'new type'. The Defiant will all be new and nothing will be off the shelf. Think, it's a Merlin, but the coolant setup, fuel supply etc, while not really hard to redo, will be a one off...
If I recall correctly, the Canadian Mozzie project by the Zaleskys was good, but expensive. Projects are generally. There is one Mozzie being restored to fly in British Columbia, and a series new build production in N.Z. by a retired yacht designer builder. There's speculation about the Flighter Collection's example. Bigger = much more expensive + difficult.
Richard Melton has a Walrus kit for restoration, avaliable for sale. It's unique (only three other grounded survivors) but no-one's bought it. I'd love to see it fly, but those with money are apparently not bothered!
The LAST Blackburn Beverley is under threat of scapping at the closed Museum of Army Transport - despite interest and effort by some enthusiasts, led by the Yorkshire Air Museum, many enthusiasts have taken a 'so what' or 'it's big, difficult and I can't see the point' attitude.
Hope this adds a bit...
Cheers
James
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Midlands
Age: 71
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gannet
I bet somebody in the RNHF will - in 20 years time - say, why the heck didn't we buy that airworthy Gannet/ spares for a hundred grand (probably a lot less in reality) in 2003?
I thing it would attract a lot of interest here and should be repatriated.
Two Mambas, gearbox and contraprop sounds like a case of - take out your wallet and repeat after me 'help yourself' as far as a civvy operator is concerned but with the RN volunteer/ knowhow it surely should be considered.
I know it will never replace the Firefly......
BTW - re they planning to acquire another??
HP
I thing it would attract a lot of interest here and should be repatriated.
Two Mambas, gearbox and contraprop sounds like a case of - take out your wallet and repeat after me 'help yourself' as far as a civvy operator is concerned but with the RN volunteer/ knowhow it surely should be considered.
I know it will never replace the Firefly......
BTW - re they planning to acquire another??
HP
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lichfield UK
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re:
"Mozzy: Has no one any interest in getting one flying again. I remember seeing a almost complete advanced project for sale in Canada ??"
Whats happened to Kermit Week's TT35 RS712 in Florida??
Did hear that it wasnt flying much but if its still extant - surely theres a viable purchase??
That Gannet certainly deserves to be back home dos'nt it, and what happened to that equally gorgous Sea Venom that flies in the US??
The Shack AEW2 should make the trek east also along with the ETPS Lightning thats being restored in Minneapolis (same crowd who have the Gannet??)
"Mozzy: Has no one any interest in getting one flying again. I remember seeing a almost complete advanced project for sale in Canada ??"
Whats happened to Kermit Week's TT35 RS712 in Florida??
Did hear that it wasnt flying much but if its still extant - surely theres a viable purchase??
That Gannet certainly deserves to be back home dos'nt it, and what happened to that equally gorgous Sea Venom that flies in the US??
The Shack AEW2 should make the trek east also along with the ETPS Lightning thats being restored in Minneapolis (same crowd who have the Gannet??)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Edge of the fens
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mossies
RS712 is unserviceable, suffering from severe delamination by all accounts. The American climate hasn't been kind to her. She's been inside the EAA Museum building at Oshkosh since at least October 1993 when I photographed her there.
TV959 (the TFC - but thought now to be EX TFC - machine) is potentially restorable to fly, with a two year timescale mentioned. Although that would require a) a vast sum of money, and b) her alleged new owner to be willing to return her to flight.
Glyn Powell is currently manufacturing Mosquito fuselages in New Zealand, but his first one has taken an age and is 'only' a static. Airworthy ones would presumably take a lot of time and money (bit of a recurring theme here...)
So never say never (just be ready with an open chequebook
)
TV959 (the TFC - but thought now to be EX TFC - machine) is potentially restorable to fly, with a two year timescale mentioned. Although that would require a) a vast sum of money, and b) her alleged new owner to be willing to return her to flight.
Glyn Powell is currently manufacturing Mosquito fuselages in New Zealand, but his first one has taken an age and is 'only' a static. Airworthy ones would presumably take a lot of time and money (bit of a recurring theme here...)
So never say never (just be ready with an open chequebook
)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Various
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The N reg Sea Venom was on the North America airshow circuit this summer.
http://www.fotodj.com/pages/dayton2003/WB583D.htm
http://www.fotodj.com/pages/dayton2003/WB583D.htm
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Various
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good eye Henry,
To be honest, I thought the Sea Venom was a two seater as well and you are right, that one doesn't look that big, nor does its nose look like a radome. However, the one pictured is N-202DM which is listed as a "DH112 Sea Venom" on the FAA Registry. How could the feds possibly get that wrong?
De Havilland apparently produced 816 single seat Venoms, 283 night fighters and 393 Sea Venoms. How many versions was the designation DH112 used for?
You are also correct about it being ex Swiss AF. Produced in 1955, serial number J1616.
I better go break out the recognition books.
Bonus shot anyway!:
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircra...egrees0930.jpg
To be honest, I thought the Sea Venom was a two seater as well and you are right, that one doesn't look that big, nor does its nose look like a radome. However, the one pictured is N-202DM which is listed as a "DH112 Sea Venom" on the FAA Registry. How could the feds possibly get that wrong?
De Havilland apparently produced 816 single seat Venoms, 283 night fighters and 393 Sea Venoms. How many versions was the designation DH112 used for?
You are also correct about it being ex Swiss AF. Produced in 1955, serial number J1616.
I better go break out the recognition books.
Bonus shot anyway!:
http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircra...egrees0930.jpg
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: RUGBY
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greetings
I agree about all the british aviation history that is not flying and should be, at least in this country
maybe we should have a word with those nice chaps in South Africa if they will send us over a couple of Lightnings or Buckaneers (hope ive spelt it rite). And maybe Atlantic will get chance to bring thier shak over from the USA.
I know it costs alot of cash to do it but maybe, just maybe
See Ya
LT
I agree about all the british aviation history that is not flying and should be, at least in this country
maybe we should have a word with those nice chaps in South Africa if they will send us over a couple of Lightnings or Buckaneers (hope ive spelt it rite). And maybe Atlantic will get chance to bring thier shak over from the USA.
I know it costs alot of cash to do it but maybe, just maybe
See Ya
LT