Warbird Information Exchange

Is it about ownership and control, or is it about honoring contracts and committments? Do the City and the Museum have a right to pull out of a contract because they either change their minds or don't like the terms? Are these entities above or exempt from following legal precedent? What does this say about doing business with them in the future? Will the next "buyer" fall foul of the same?

I base my comments on discussions with some folks at Duxford. Basically, Princess had a lot of new build parts in her and she passed the CAA routine. Multiple Spitfires have been built from all new parts. This all meets with CAA approval. Maybe it would have to be done at a CAA approved facility. The other thing is I also said probably. Figuring out if the structure is sound and the glue hasn't deteriorated would be my biggest concern. Even if stored indoors. I did a pre-buy on an FG-1 that flew very little over a 25 year span and was stored indoors pretty much in that time. On the ailerons The wood had shrunk, glue had deteriorated, you could poke the tip of a pencil through the wood in places and many glue joints had separated. Not to say this is what is there but it deserves careful attention.
Rich

Our museum developed a scheme to carry out full NDT inspections of the wooden structure.

Our B35 came through, not exactly with flying colours, but it was possible to determine what would need doing to repair the existing structure. RS700 hould be in better overall condition, having been stored inside most of its life.

There is certainly a degree of risk in buying the aircraft and expecting the structure to be OK, but it is not beyond possibility.

Anyone who has offered such a significant figure for the aircraft will, I am sure have done their homework, and checked out the structure as best they can.


Bruce

I'm a Canadian and live only about an hour and a half away from the museum. I see nothing wrong with the Mossie going to someone who will restore and preserve the airplane. If it stays where it is nothing will ever be done with it, and if it is it's very likely to be done by well meaning but unskilled hands, and we all know what that means. Airplanes like this change hands and countries all the time. If it goes to England, or the US or Down Under now it is just as likely as not to be found in Mike Potter's hangar in Quebec ten years from now, happy, content, and dripping oil on that nice clean floor.

My two cents - fire away.

Dan

Hello All,

I have 2 Mosquito related questions;

1. In talking about the wooden structure, delamination, and whether to replace/restore....Does anyone know about the MX history of RR299? This airplane flew on the circuit for 50 years before it's untimely demise. How did it's structure hold up over all that time? Was it ever fully restored?

2. What became of the Mosquito that was hanging in the IWM with one wing cut off, and eventually went to TFC? Do they still own it and is the plan still to restore it to flying condition?

Thanks in advance,
Pete

Can you give us an overview of this NDT process?

Bruce,
that was covered back in a copy of aeroplane monthly back in the 90's I think. Wasnt it something like scans of the wood? I remember markins on the cockpit side where scans had been done were outlined in red where areas were of a concern.

_________________
Cheers,
Peter

________

delete

OK

Firstly, RR299. Lets remember that the aircraft ceashed as a result of an engine problem. The aircraft was extensively surveyed when the fabric was replaced in 1992. I was part of the team that did the re-cover. The wood was in very good condition. At the time, there had been no way of testing the glue, so they did some analysis of similar Mosquito structure, taken from what was then the IWM's T3, TV959. The two aircraft had similar backgrounds, and had been similarly kept over the years, and they were able to show little evidence of glue separation.

I did hear some tittle tattle after the crash relating to the poor condition of the wood, but as the aircraft basically exploded and burnt when it hit the ground, it is difficult to say with any certainty what that condition was. I was handed two parts of the wing in the mid nienties, by someone who had taken them from a skip. They were in poor shape, but bearing in mind, they had gone into a peat bog, having smashed from the aircraft, this is no big surprise!

NDT techniques - basically, we used a local NDT company, who were able to use standard X-ray equipment, to inspect the wood. Used on a low power setting, we were able to determine where the glue was not holding up on the fuselage (although not the strength of the surviving glue), and also to find areas of rot and degradation. I dont know the exact details, but will go back and see what I can find!


Bruce

I just received an important update regarding the possible sale of the Mosquito bomber RS700!

As it stands right now, Calgary Aerospace is trying to convince City of Calgary to let them sell the mosquito to an annon collector in the UK for $1.5 Million dollars with $500.000 dollars going into the restoration of their Canadian built Hawker Hurricane. That is what has been put out over the media channels

I was informed that not only is the Mosquito bomber being sold, BUT the Hawker Hurricane is to go to the UK as well to be rebuilt to static display and then return to Canada!

The Hurricane was given a donation of $50.000 to restore the Hurricane to static display. Where did that money go as the Hurricane is now in storage and was never completed.

As most of you know when an aircraft is taken on as a restoration project, parts go missing or are discarded or swapped out for parts from other aircraft to make a static project. What will return to Canada will be a Hurricane Yes but nothing like what left as far as a complete and original aircraft is.

Another interesting note is that a current member of Aerospace museum is now a member of city council(a conflict of interest) and is withholding important information from the public. He also seems he is being brainwashed as one minute he is saying it will cost $15 Million to restore the mosquito and the next thing he is saying it is "rotting away"

What I fail to understand is that Aerospace has in the past sold off 4 aircraft to generate funds to cover the operating costs of the museum and staff. If they are allowed to sell the mosquito and the hurricane, then where does it stop? Is the Lancaster next on the list as it doesn't fit in with the name of the museum??

_________________
Cheers,
Peter

________

Yes, but a Mossie is very different to a Spit, P-51 etc.

BAe have said they will no longer provide support in any way, which is the potential stumblng block to new build structure.....in terms of expense....as this would have to be pressumably undertaken under control of a certified company, which may preclude use of any of the NZ new build structures....and there is no other source of new build structure.
I'm guessing there are similarites here with the problems of certification of the Flug Werke 190's in the UK......perhaps more so with the material in question.....????

Coo, I havent posted as much on WIX in years!

BAe may or may not be a problem depending on how it is classified. BAe have no involvement with the Spitfire or Hurricane for example.

BAe will no support the Mosie as they no longer have knowledge of wooden structure - its a fair point!


Bruce

A mosquito is very unlikely to be classified as 'complex' - it should not therefore require manufacturer support to fly in the UK on a Permit to Fly(in the same way the Blenheim did not and B-17 Sally B does not).

The discussion about the possibility of using a new airframe as the basis of a restoration in the UK is interesting. So long as the aircraft is perceived as a resoration of an existing airframe the Flugwerk 'replica' problem should not be an issue.

However this would be a high profile project and the obvious and wholesale replacement with an entirely new airframe, possibly constructed abroad, would I think raise questions from the authorities that are not asked of the average Spitfire project.

The attraction of the Calgary airframe is that it would likely not require such wholesale structural replacement and could consequently be restored to flying condition and operate on a permit in the same way as other warbirds do in the UK.

_________________
Warbird Colour - Authentic historic aircraft finishes http://www.warbirdcolour.co.uk

While on the subject of Mosquito's in various conditions in storage, I thought I'd post some of the NASM's rarely seen TH998. I got to see her on the tour I took in August of '97.

(Scott, Please feel free to use these under the Warbird Registry entry!)






Cheers,
Peter

My very humble opinion: Would you rather have your mossie sit where it is, in it's condition, and to perhaps never be restored to any sort of presentable condition? or would you rather have the aircraft leave your backyard and go to a place when someone will completely restore it to possible flying condition. To me that's a "no-brainer", but I DO understand your loyalty and patriotism. This may be a terrible analogy, but in my neck of the woods, people with horses, who love them dearly, but cannot take care of them, gladly, yet sadly, give the horses to others who can take care of them. Sounds like your mossie will have a better home. And you still get money and such in return. IMHO