Warbird Information Exchange

Hello all,


Looking on the info about the painting applied to the FW190A8/N G-FWAB at Duxford last Flying Legends show I got lost.

The gear door says FW190A9, the GINFO database A8.

Badge on the nose is of III Gruppe/Jagdgeschwader 11.

Code <<+- is of the commanding officer of II Gruppe, that never flew with the FW190 but only BF109s

The Iron Cross with 60 victories on Eastern and Western Front is most probably referring to Anton Hackl but when he was flying with JG11 he was commanding II Gruppe JG 11 (BF109) and later he was commanding officer of JG11 and far exceeded the 60 kills..

Anybody has a clue on it, or is it a so called arty, because it looks nice with those mixed up markings?

Looking forward to your thought on this matter!

Cheers,

Michael

His plane,his money,his paint scheme.

_________________
Those who think it,s impossible should leave the ones doing it alone..
http://www.spitfireprojecta58-27.com/

It's a Flug Werke replica, nothing to do with a genuine Focke Wulf or with any genuine Focke Wulf parts. Giving it any sub-designation relating to a real Fw190 is, really, completely irreverent.

The scheme (apparently as per owner's wishes) is a spares-box mash.

The real point is that it should be flying, something which appears to be becoming trickier to achieve each year in the UK.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Amen, brother! It's not even a good fake. Another series of let downs: Me 262's, Oscars, FW-190s. At least the Yaks and the Zeros were OK while produced.

_________________
Live to fly, Fly to live.....

Wait a minute -- The guys who have poured their hearts, talents and wallets into reproducing all kinds of rare or extinct WWI, WWII and between-the-wars warbirds and civil aircraft deserve much, much more credit and respect than this. Without them, how many of us would ever have had the chance to see a flying 190, 262, Oscar, F3F, Yak-3/9, Hughes H-1, Gee Bee R2, DR-1, countless other WWI fighters, etc.

Slam these guys, slam the guy who accurately rebuilds a warbird and paint it with semi-gloss, slam the guy who jacks up a dataplate and builds a fighter under it, slam the guy who over-restores his plane, slam the guy who under-restores his plane, slam the guy who flies a rare plane that should be locked in a museum, slam the guy who displays in a museum a rare plane that could be flown, slam the guy who lovingly saves a back yard full of "junk" for 40 years, and slam the guy who just doesn't do it the way someone else thinks he should do it and there will be about 6 people left on this board, none of whom have ever done or even tried to do anything.

The pursuit of excellence is admirable and to quibble over the details is normal and fine, but let's not loose sight of just how much these guys have accomplished and contributed to the warbird scene. My hat's off to them. I for one would love to see an FW in the air.

I keep waiting for the "complainer's" to step up to the plate and buy and restore thier own warbird in what they say is accurate color and markings for that aircraft. But, I haven't seen that happen yet. Maybe they are upset because the owner didn't consult with them before the aircraft was painted. When you buy or restore a warbird, you can paint it any way you want.

For the record, I think the Flug Werke efforts (and others mentioned) are highly laudable. Certainly I'd like to see any of them in action as I have done for ones like the F3Fs.

I don't care what it is, as long as there's no attempt to pretend a modern build lookalike aircraft is an original, and my post above was simply to clarify that there's no point in ascribing -8 or whatever numbers or sweating over an original scheme on a modern derivative design.

If it's painted in a real Focke Wulf's scheme, that's nice. But not as important as getting it flying, and again for the record there are two challenges here - the issues evident in Flug Werke aircraft flying (I presume through teething problems) and the UK CAA's current crusade to reduce aviation in the UK to airliners only.

Having helped (in a minor way) several warbird owners to achieve more accurate schemes I'm quite happy in offering a professional insight - professional as someone who has earned money moving data and analysing it in the warbird business for over 20 years now.

I my not entirely agree with all of Chuck's opinions, but I certainly respect them and his experience - greater than many of us - in walking the warbird talk.

Personally, I enjoy occasionally getting the chance to play with other people's aircraft. My opinions haven't stopped that happening and the invitations keep coming.

The documented improvements in accuracy of restorations and schemes have not come from people 'respecting' owners rights by keeping silent, or buying their own to make a point, so let's just move on from that myth and just learn to tell constructive from irrelevant criticism.

You may differ, and welcome.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Chuck, I'm just curious as to why you think it is "not even a good fake". I believe the Flug Werk replica's are very accurate representations of the 190. They even incorporate parts of original 190's on them. The replica's are within 95% accuracy of the originals, with, of course, the biggest difference being the powerplant. But BMW 801's aren't exactly the most plentiful engines around.

Also, why do you think Yak's were better? In my opinion they are much less accurate representations. IIRC, the Yak -3/-7/9 repro's had very large changes from their original designs to accomodate both the new -1710 powerplants as well as safety improvements. I seem to remember that even the airfoil might have been changed and the cockpit moved from it's original location. IMO, the new build Yak's looked nothing like the originals, but that's O.K., because I accept them for what they are - a replica. The 190's are much, much more believable "fakes" than the Yaks.

I'm not trying to start an argument here, I'm just trying to find out why you feel the way you do. It seems in direct contradiction to what I think and a lot of people that I know think.

IMO, I believe the Flug Werk 190's are EXCELLENT fakes. If you want to talk bad fakes, let's talk Jurca 190's, Tora Zero's, "Polar Bear" - an "alleged" A model Mustang, HA-1112's, etc. Does that make you enjoy these airplanes less despite the fact that they look nothing like what they are supposed to represent?

Let's have a civil discussion on this, shall we?

I can't stand pious people.

Please give credit where it is due. Hands up those who have put their money and talents where their mouths are!

I owned a Tora Zero - historic as a movie airplane [42 years ago]. It has its own history.

These are not "fakes" because the owners aren't pretending that they are original [unlike LV bags and Rolex watches from Singapore and Hong Kong].

Gentlemen please act with a little maturity....

_________________
..defeat is never an option!

Really? Such as? My understanding was that this is not the case.

IIRC, Chuck posted that a genuine Fw-190 rebuild ordered some Flug Werke parts - which did not fit / were not compatible with the restoration of the real thing.

The (I presume) oil cooler on the top cowling where the guns would be on the prototype type is an interesting and major variation in terms of the visual 'credibility' of the thing. That said, it's an impressive piece of kit.

Civil discussions are so dull. Oh, OK then.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Hello all,

I'd simply asked for the markings applied and nothing else

Now everybody is talking about the FW190A8/N (the N is for Nachbau/Replica) so that's not the issue. It's a gorgeous looking machine, but, just diggin into WWII Luftwaffe markings I am curious about the markings applied on it

Any answers to that?

Cheers,

Michael

You've had two, plus an explanation, which includes the type discussion.

If you want more detail than 'the owner liked the colours' I suggest you contact the Aircraft Restoration Company.

HTH.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

The Flug Werk website (English version) had the list of items on the airplane which were original. I don't remember all of them, but I distinctly remember reading that Flug Werk acquired a cache of something like 12 to 16 original 190 tailwheels which were going to be incorporated into the replicas. I've tried to find the reference on the Flug Werk website to it, but: 1) it seems they took down the English version of it, 2) the website has been revamped and they deleted nearly all of the background reference material on the new build 190's. Even with the help of the Babelfish translator, I couldn't find any references to it. But, I am absolutely 100% positive I read that, because I thought it was unusual that they were going to use original parts, so it stuck in my mind. It is possible, however, that maybe that original plan was not executed and they did NOT use original tailwheels. Either case, I would like to know the truth and I'm willing to be corrected if somebody can provide definitive information on that.

From wikipedia, here is a link which confirms what I saw:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fw_190

"Some of these new Fw 190s are known to be fitted with the original tail wheel units from the Second World War; a small cache of tail gear having been discovered."





Perhaps so, but that is not surprising on account of several factors:

1) Later in the war, the standardization of parts and tolerances became less strict as the Germans became more desperate to build fighters under the rigors of Allied bombing attacks while building planes in caves, underground, in forests, etc., in appalling conditions. Added to this, a lot of the late war aircraft were built by slave labor from Jews and non-Aryan prisoners. A lot of the German war machine was intentionally built sloppy or outright sabotaged in efforts to impede them.

2) If the recent "authentic" 190 rebuilds were relying on blueprints, then we know that sometimes aircraft parts are not always built strictly according to the blueprints. This was a common practice back then in the 30's and 40's for many countries - Germany and U.S. included. There are variations between completed assembly line aircraft and the "perfect, in-tolerance" blueprint built versions.

3) The Flug Werk aircraft, according to the company, was never intended to be a "100% accurate" aircraft. It was started, designed, and built all along as a "replica". On the official Flug Werk website it was stated that it was intended to be approximately "95% accurate". So, not every part will be interchangeable with real 190 parts.

4) The Fw 190 was produced in numbers over 20,000 with something like 100 different variants. Unless that particular restoration was the EXACT same variant then it's no surprise that some of the parts didn't fit. Does a "generic" Spitfire part fit on every Spitfire? No, of course not. Here is a link to all of the variants of the wartime 190 built:

http://fw190.hobbyvista.com/variants.htm

ARC has nothing to do with the FW190 markings, it's owned by Spitfire Ltd. But thanks anyway.

I thought that this was a forum for like minded folk. Being somewhat uncivil does not equate.

People have often posed a reasonable question eg. FW190 colour scheme only to be rebuked by the "experts". Let's look at this; "ex"{X} is an unknown quantity and "spert" {spurt} is a drip under pressure.

_________________
..defeat is never an option!