Warbird Information Exchange

He|| yeah, that's what I'm talking about. I'm THRILLED to see folks building these things- especially the new-build 262s. Those are absolutely replicas, built from the ground up, and beautifully done to boot. The only reason I feel this beautiful P-40 might not merit the label is because it's not a complete fabrication-somebody just put a different engine in it. That's all.

I'm still a little curious about the history of the airframe though- and why convert an E to an F, if there's an F out there to be had. Or even more perplexing, converting an F to an E... how odd.

Anyways, onwards and upwards...

Lynn

Without wanting to start a heated discussion inside this thread, I do think it is not quite helpful to try to find out if a certain airplane is a replica or reproduction. It would be much better to try to decide what is what by calling it by totally different terms nobody can argue about IMHO. For example it would be much better, to say, a certain plane is a "historical" one, meaning most of it (let´s just say more than 50 % of it) is the real original thing (like FHC´s Fw 190 A-5). If there is less than 50 % the genuine original one (maybe only the dataplate, lol), it is an "rebuilt". And if it is built totally new, without incorporating any historical parts related to a certain plain it wants to be, it´s a "newbuilt", if sticking to the original drawings (maybe even conversion like the Buchóns with DB 605 to Bf 109 G- ´s), or a different one, resembling a certain type (like the Flugwek Kits without incorporating any original parts). It seems to be simple if you skip the part deciding if a certain plane has 50.1 + % original parts or 49.9 - %. Or am I simply wrong?

Michael

P.S: To me seeing any of the above is great. Nothing wrong seeing a Flugwerk 190 look like a Focke-Wulf 190, or the new built Me 262´s, it gives you the right impression, and one important thing is: they f l y !!!!!

Nathan, according to "Classic Wings"(thanks Dave McDonald ) it is the longer tail version.
P-40F-15, 41-19841

"Just found this on the TFC website Murray Griffith P-40F Replica finally arrives at Duxford"

I am glad this post is running. I now know that Moonbeam is a 'replica', since it is on its 12th set of replacement tires.
Whew....had me worried!

VL

I know a little bit about this airframe.Its not a replica.Its a rebuild.

_________________
Hang The Expense

I was waiting on a comment like that

_________________
"There are two types of people here; airshow whores and airshow prostitutes. The whores, like you and I, do airshow stuff for free, whereas the prostitutes are paid" - Reg Urschler

Depends if they are Goodyear or Aero Classic. If they are retreads we'll put you in the rebuild category.

_________________
Rich Palmer

Remember an Injured Youth
benstear.org
#64- Stay Strong and Keep the Faith

BOOM BOOM, ROUND ROUND, PROPELLER GO

Don't Be A Dilbert!

As I've gotten older and researched and written about a few warbirds I guess I have moved into the rivet counter category, but many seem to put a bit of a negative spin on that term. I like seeing an airplane, such as Yagen's FM-2, restored to what is once was, staying true to the airframe. I'm the same way about Corvettes, I get more excited about an all original 1971 LT-1 than a hot-rodded car.

That being said....did this P-40F or some of its original parts begin life as an F-model? I really don't know much about P-40s, but from what I read in Air Classics last year surviving F-models are pretty rare. Is this true?


Chappie

_________________
Brrring. Dispersal? TWO SECTIONS SCRAMBLE!!

Like I posted,I know the airframe and its not a replica.

_________________
Hang The Expense

So does a P-40 perform much differently with a Merlin?

The reason our Air Force Museum has modified the F model to an E is simple, the RNZAF never operated the merlin powered F but did operate the E in large numbers, so to honour our P40 boys the decision was made to convert it. Not all agree I know but the history of the aircraft and its original engine installation will be displayed with the aircraft. And to give another interesting perspective the Allison installed has never been in an aircraft having been a spare engine.

Yes, Merlin cuts TBO in half!

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

Seriously? Who gives a flying F WTF it is, looks like a P40, flies like a P40 & if some people don't like it then you are free to buy the darn thing & melt it down.

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.

There was not an option to get a real P-40E?



ZRX61.....that's a well thought response.



Chappie

_________________
Brrring. Dispersal? TWO SECTIONS SCRAMBLE!!

It was a trade for the F4U-4 Corsair which again wasn't the same model as the RNZAF examples and would have been a big job to modify to an F4U-1 or FG-D so when the F model was put forward and the airframe was basically an E model it was either take the opportunity or miss out altogether. The other thing that made the deal was the fuselage had been rebuilt already and basically needed fitting out. Still a huge job as the wings were a mess but they have done a beautiful job on the aircraft regardless of what model it is.