Warbird Information Exchange

Thanks for your input Dano! Can we expect to see your 190 flying during next airshow season?

Everyone related to the project is contractually obligated to FHC to not distribute photos or videos (with an exception or two). With all the time, money, and logistics Mr. Allen has put into this project, I'm sure everyone can understand that he would like to be the first to release them. More info will be forthcoming soon, I would imagine.
Meanwhile, Mr. Kirkand's 190 is nearing completion and will indeed be a first class aircraft.

_________________
Without wires, it won't work.

No problem, we understand! Thanks for the info!

The sound from the engine test video of the BMW 801 on the Vintage Radials website was very unique. I expected the radial to have the normal clatter from the ones we usually see, but the 801 was running as smooth as a Swiss watch. I was impressed by both the engine and the work to get it running. I hope it inspires others find and use more 801s that may be out there.

And I also cannot wait to see a video of the flight when it is released to the public. Congrats to all.

_________________
"They done it, they done it, damned if they ain't flew." December 17, 1903

For Stutts...
P51Mstg wrote:
Of course in the world of aviation you seem to be able to get away with a lot more than you could if you were restoring cars.

Can you support that? IMHO, the history, rebuilds and provenance of all currently active front line W.W.II era aircraft is well documented (in fact they are all in one book - the Warbird Directory, which in most cases covers the occasions of rebuilds). I'm not familiar with the car business, but there are more cars, players, restorers and lower certification requirements for rebuilds - hence a much greater opportunity for fraud, or fiddled provenances.

@@@@@@@@@

I can think of several P-51s off hand that probably share few if any parts with the airplane serial # that is on the data plate. You buy a "wreck" (after hitting the ground there are few usable parts left) and use the identity and have a new airplane built around it. I know of one WWI era biplane that the project started as a dataplate and a couple of brass fittings. Then it was "restored" in the owner's workshop. He handmade about every piece of a plane except the engine (which was probably never installed in that airframe at anytime in the last 80+ years). Now we have a "restoration"...

One interesting P-51 a few years back. I see a picture in a magazine of a Mustang getting rebuilt, identity and owner are secret. Thats in the spring. Airplane shows up at Oshkosh. Amazing, but the "data plate donor" is still in a warehouse and had been sold to someone else without the dataplate and paperwork. But now this is a "restoration". (More to the story, which is actually funny in a way, but this isn't the place to tell it).

Cars.... Well, if I build a Shelby 427 SC replica in my garage and attach an originial bumper to it... That doesn't make it an original restored Shelby. If I take a VIN plate (car dataplate for you who don't live in the USA) and put it on that car with the bumper that goes with the VIN plate, it still isn't a restoration.

If I wreck my car and its totaled , I can't repair it by finding another car without a VIN plate and replacing the VIN plate. In the USA thats a federal crime. Basically you can do that on an airplane (assuming your local FSDO is cooperating and I know of a couple that don't).

Cars go a step further now. Personally, I like old muscle cars and Corvettes. New ones (current production) have such greater performance, there is no need to drive the old ones. Problem is (and I worked at Chrysler and had records of all production, most of which I copied and took home with me), the record keeping isn't that good. The Hemi cars came off the same line with the regular cars. If the factory could build them, so can someone in his garage. If they can counterfit $100 bills, they can also do car paperwork. (passing that off as an original and not a "tribute" (reproduction) is fraud by the way)

Corvettes are easier. I was in Carslile 2 years ago and there were 2 guys there taking orders for Corvettes. You named the year, color and options you wanted and they went out and built you a PERFECT Corvette just like it rolled out of the factory (all for about $200k or so). Its "tribute" or "replica" (its a real Corvette, but not one that came from the facotry that way), but you can enjoy it just like its 1967 again.

When it comes to collectible cars, you need someone who knows what he's looking at to look at it. There are a lot of cases of people buying something that doesn't turn out to be original. Those are generally looked at as FRAUD in the court (selling something claiming its something it isn't).

Airplanes, you can get away with a whole lot. Fortunately with warbirds, its easier to figure it out since the number of airframes is limited and there are a lot of people out there who know the story.

Mark H

_________________
Fly safe or you get to meet me .......

I will get some pictures out on the progress of the fw, a quick update of where we stand. The electrical is complete and the plane was powered up last week and we have started to go through the system. It looks all go expect we had a bad proximity sensor on the left gear, even though it is a new sensor. Anyway , a new one will be here on Monday and beyond that the systems appear to be working. We are balancing and rigging the controls, doing it the per the original German manual, that should be completed next week. From that we are working on the inner upper gear well are being worked on and will be completed next week. We had a meeting with the painter and Malcolm Laing to go over the painting scheme and colors that were correct for the Piller D Day fly over. In addition, Malcolm was king enough to give us correct data tags for the airplane that will be put on. The big issue is the prop from MT, we are waiting to hear when we will get the propeller back and can mount it. The currant plan is to go to paint with in the next few weeks and then mount the prop and it is ready to fly. The paper work is about done with the registration coming and the maintenance paperwork completed and ready for the airworthiness cert. For me, I have completed the stallion 51 check out program and have a type rating for the 51. We should be flying about the 2nd week on Jan. ( depending on prop)
Dan

Awesome, thanks for the update, Dan! Refresh my memory, is your Flug Werk the one that Malcolm had or does he still have his as well? What's the status of his, if it's not now yours?

Malcolm never had a Flug Werk machine, he had an A-6 rebuilt from parts which he sold some years back.

_________________
Classic Wings Magazine

https://www.classicwings.com/

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/ClassicWingsMagazine/

Preserved Axis Aircraft

http://www.classicwings.com

Was the Dora, Black 12, that has been in Stallion51 hangar still there? It would be a great fit in Jim's hangar and Rich working on it.....

Thanks Dave. With all the 190's changing hands so often recently, it's hard to keep track of them all!

I was starting to get very confused. Thought we were talking about the FHC Fw190 and not any other one.

_________________
'Coups De Foudre'
(511FS, 405FG watering hole), St Dizier, France 1944/45

P51Mstg wrote:"When it comes to collectible cars, you need someone who knows what he's looking at to look at it. There are a lot of cases of people buying something that doesn't turn out to be original. Those are generally looked at as FRAUD in the court (selling something claiming its something it isn't)."

Along those lines:
Many years ago there was a famous lawsuit by Ferrari over the assembly and sale of the 1964 250GTO series sports car (Originals trade for $24 to $28m.) A Swiss fella had bought all the remaining original spare parts for this car from the factory. He began assembling them for sale as original 250GTOs. He had enough parts to make some number under 8 cars. Ferrari sued & won that they were not original cars. Yet, the irony, they did use 100% actual factory parts. The parts then scattered to the four corners after the lawsuit and subsequent mysterious death of the Swiss man.
FYI,
VL

I know this is way off original topic but I wanted to respond to the recent posts, sorry.

I think the replica vs. original benchmark most people use for aircraft comes down to the FAA rules. If the FAA accepts it as standard category, then it is considered to be "original". People seem to philosophically apply these same benchmarks to warbirds (non std. cat. ones) and homebuilts as "rules" for originality even though they are experimental category aircraft. Ultimately, the FAA is concerned about safety for paying customers, not authenticity of provenance or detail. Original parts or parts built to original blueprints are both considered safe and therefor within the standard category certification (safety) rules.

The Pitcairn Mailwing at the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome was assembled, after the factory stopped producing that airframe, by a local mechanic using factory built spare parts. It was registered standard category based on a letter from the Pitcairn factory certifying that the parts were factory built. That met the FAA rules, apparently, even though it was not assembled by the factory. Also, some of the Pitcairn built aircraft were badly wrecked a time or two to the extent that they were "rebuilt" using all new factory built wings and fuselages etc., with instrument panels with attached data plate and other undamaged parts swapped over. These rebuilds done at the factory and elsewhere. So, how should those aircraft have been categorized? Factory built replicas and non-factory built replicas? The factory and FAA both considered them repair jobs so that is good enough for me.

One more thing to think about. The difference between the Pitcairn PA-6 and Pitcairn PA-7, from a certification standpoint, seems to be just based on the engine model. After engine swaps, the FAA has changed the model number from a 6 to a 7 and back. They don't care about how it was delivered from the factory, just that it meets the certification rules.

Regarding 190s. I am thankful for people like both Paul Allen AND Dano and look forward to hopefully seeing both aircraft fly in person some day.

If an aircraft conforms to a "TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET" then it is considered
standard category or not. In the case of the PITCAIRN the "HOLDER" of the TCDS
accepted the built from parts aircraft as an original,which they can do and the FAA
should approve.So it became a standard.
The PAUL ALLEN FW-190 is registered EXPERIMENTAL EXHIBITION because there
is no TYPE CERTIFICATE for it to conform to. P-51,p-40N,t-6,bt-13.and several more
have a TYPE CERTIFICATE. corsairs,bearcats (except one),p-40E's,p-47,ect do not
so they are EXPERIMENTAL EXHIBITION licensed.
Being a factory built or factory built and repaired using factory data vs replica does
have an effect on standard vs experimental
but it is not the only factor. If it conforms to the TCDS is the factor. Most have serial
number call outs that limit someone from building a exact copy that conforms to
every part of the TCDS except it does not have a factory serial number.