Any news on FW190's flying?

[JDK]

Would a Stuka or 110cost more than Glacier Girl?

Yes, and considerably. Think about the engine costs (starting with getting them) and then what on Glacier Girl was 'Government Furnished Equipment', rarer and more collectable for German material even if it exists at all, plus the fact that the construction methodology was German, Messerschmitt, not American, and thus would require different working practices and tools.

Sure, it's 'just another airplane' but it's also a completely different aircraft too.

A 'looky-likey' scratchbuilt replica would be cheaper and easier, but wouldn't be a Stuka, any more than the existing scale replicas are.

[Augsburgeagle]

well I'm still waiting to see the uhu fly!

[Mike]

As a counter to your comments re FHC Luftwaffe types, James, I'd mention the Me262. It is about as esoteric as you can get, and a real challenge to rebuild. Lots of steel airframe parts to be remanufactured from scratch, and original WWII-technology jet engines to be rebuilt with modern-technology alloys. Having seen the project for myself a few weeks back, I can assure you that it contains some major engineering challenges for a restorer.

Compared with that, a Stuka or Me110 (assuming a suitable airframe as a starting point) would be a walk in the park.

[JDK]

As a counter to your comments re FHC Luftwaffe types, James, I'd mention the Me262. It is about as esoteric as you can get, and a real challenge to rebuild. Lots of steel airframe parts to be remanufactured from scratch, and original WWII-technology jet engines to be rebuilt with modern-technology alloys. Having seen the project for myself a few weeks back, I can assure you that it contains some major engineering challenges for a restorer.

Compared with that, a Stuka or Me110 (assuming a suitable airframe as a starting point) would be a walk in the park.

I was waiting for the 262 to pop up! Certainly that would be the top end of the FHC's 'list' at the moment I'd agree.

But in research terms, the 262 is 'relatively' common in original form compared to the Ju 87 or Me 110, with more complete airframes and ironically, significantly more data in the West on the type. The engines, I agree are a very interesting challenge and I'd not suggest that it is in any way 'easy', but as you've popped in at the end, Mike, the critical point is again: 'assuming a suitable airframe as a starting point'. If then, yes. If not, a much greater challenge remains and the re manufacture of the Junkers or Messerschmitt 1930s technology to make a mostly new-build example would be in a similar league to re-building a 262, IMHO.

Of course these are all just stepping stones to a Gigant or Heinkel Uhu!

[Mike]

Oh, I dunno, a Gigant wouldn't take much, knock up a frame, a bit of fabric work, probably the biggest task would be painting the thing!

Now the one I'm really looking forward to is the Fw189. A unique survivor, distinctive shape, 'unsexy' compared with the Luftwaffe fighter and attack types. All that needs to be done is put floats on it and it would be my perfect aeroplane!

Isn't there an Me110 that has been completely restored somewhere in Europe? I saw photos somewhere that looked very nice indeed. Again I'm not a JDK historian with all the answers ... (joke), but why couldn't you take this airframe, if you could get it in the first place and configure it to airworthy? I'm just throwing this out for discussion, not interested in an argument, just a robust debate. I know the powerplants would be a problem, but the airframe looked outstanding.

BTW, I'm sure one of you experts has a photo or two of this Me110, what ever museum it went to. I remember it looked outstanding.

Personally, I really think if Paul Allen has an interest in a 163 and a 262, why not a Stuka? ... they all are extremely expensive. And I don't buy the excuse of the FHC having some sort of mandate. Nothing really matches anything really. Unless your talking front line fighters. Well then yes I can see that, but if you look at the FAA registry for Paul's group, he seems to have 3 zero's. Am I right on this ... 262 chime in.

Now the one I'm really looking forward to is the Fw189. A unique survivor, distinctive shape, 'unsexy' compared with the Luftwaffe fighter and attack types. All that needs to be done is put floats on it and it would be my perfect aeroplane!

Yes indeed!!!!!

Last edited by Hellcat on Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

[Augsburgeagle]

The 110 you saw was the Berlin technical museums 110, I think it is one of the Jim pearce ones. Let's get to work on the 229, BV155, 388 and 152 first but for gods sake don't let the people who 'restored' the G-10 at them, they've probably still got some gloss blue paint.

edit, forgot the 388!

just look at this baby!
http://www.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~ver ... 388US.html

The 110 you saw was the Berlin technical museums 110, I think it is one of the Jim pearce ones.

Would you happen to have some photos of that particular 110?

Beautiful machine. And thx much if you do.

Mark

[Steve Nelson]

Can I throw in a vote for an airworthy Fw-200?

SN

[Augsburgeagle]

Not my photo:



I think there is a Fw200 restoration going on at the moment.

Thanks for that shot, outstanding airplane.

[Steve Nelson]

Fantasitc pic! I didn't realize there were any complete 110s besides the one in the RAF Museum.

Looks like a Ju-88 being restored in the background. Now that would be an awsome bird to see in the air. I wonder if FlugWerk could build one powered by Allisons?

SN