Warbird Information Exchange

As a purist , I am saying that the aircraft should be restored as that particular airframe was when built
A very controversial statement I know as we see many vintage aircraft out there with paint schemes that did not belong to that particular airframe. So where do we draw the line.
It depends on what you are trying to represent with the restoration
An accurate original example or a workhorse to make money with thru rides
Most Mustangs were single seat and the ones that I have seen converted are not converted as per factory specs.

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

True but it should not be by sacrificing the originality of a historic airframe.

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

Agreed, but we're not discussing an original historic airframe, are we....unless I've missed a topic change? The non-combat domestic aircraft is a composite of various wrecks which has spent 40 years in various states of reassemblage according to the VWOC notes. As I understand it so far, we're not talking about chopping up anything but to reconfigure the turtleback, add a seat and a canopy and off you go...basically.

_________________
He bowls overhand...He is the most interesting man in the world.
"In Peace Japan Breeds War", Eckstein, Harper and Bros., 3rd ed. 1943(1927, 1928,1942)
"Leave it to ol' Slim. I got ideas...and they're all vile, baby." South Dakota Slim
"Ahh..."The Deuce", 28,000 pounds of motherly love." quote from some Mojave Grunt
DBF

It is quite simple, their plane, their way! Ta Da!

Looked it up. The C of G envelope we have on our spreadsheet is indeed the WWII one. Aft limit 60.4.

Cam, I hear what you're saying. The best of all possible worlds is having a Principle Supporter who, smiling happily, just keeps writing cheques. (No, I'm wrong -- what would be better would be if I WAS the Principle Supporter.)

But if the Principle Supporter comes to you and says, "Find alternate sources of revenue," then that's that. You need to do all the things museums and charities do around the world to raise funds. There is no choice.

If you try to tell a Principle Supporter how to spend his money, odds are you will personally find out pretty quickly how he came by it in the first place. In short, you can have any opinion you want, but it's his that counts.

Also, the Principle Supporter may be trying to wean the Museum off the regular cheques, gradually, so that it has a chance of continuing on into the far future.

The thing about a Flying Museum, as opposed to a Static one, is that there are large costs every year. Good mechanics don't come cheap, nor should they. A Static Museum only needs large infusions of money during a building upgrade or an aircraft aquisition. But a Flying Museum needs a large sum every year. Corporations don't always write cheques annually. So, the Corporation that was generous last year, may not be so generous next year. FMs may need to chase every source of revenue they can find, period.

At VWoC this summer there was a no-flying order for the fighters, and staff layoffs. Quite a few salaries were reduced.

So, I agree with you, mostly. The Mk IV Hurricane, which has a combat history with 6 Sqn RAF in Italy and the Mid-East, should not be touched. But the XII never went overseas, and it's only real story is the one of its restoration with the collector in Sask., which we've had to do over again due to corrosion in the wing center-section. Modifying it should be comparatively easy -- easier than modifying the P-40. As is, there is already a great big empty hole immediately aft of the pilot. Only bracing wires are in that space now. Almost no metal has to be cut.

Having the only 2-seat Hurricane in the world would attract sponsors from all over the world. The decision may become as simple as that.

Like you Cam, I have only an opinion to offer. The decision hinges on the Business Analysis, and the Engineering Analysis. I expect we'll hear the result early in the winter.

Dave

Dave
Thanks for your input
Yes bottom line is the owner can do what he likes but with ownership of historic aircraft comes the responsibility and obligation of preservation , Afterall we are only custodians of these aircraft.
Not all owners are interested in the originality of their aircraft and hey, the pay the bucks , they get the choice... bottom line.
Having spent my life in the vintage aircraft world as well as Museums and archeological sites in general ( my older Brother was an Archeologist and Museum Curater for most of his life) I am well aware of funding issues that VWC and other Museums are up against..
Further I fully understand Mike wanting his collection to eventually sustain itself and not become a money pit
Preserving a flying collection becomes a huge challenge when trying to balance originality with reality
I wish all the groups in these circumstances nothing but success.
Again just my 2 cents as I am interested in preserving and maintaining examples of aircraft used by Canada , so I for one would love to see the Hurricane in her colours she wore here in Canada during the war . I don't think there is one done like that anywhere.
At the end of the day, at least it is not sitting somewhere rotting away . She is in a pretty good home.

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

Well if you put it that way the vast majority of vintage aircraft out there barely have any of the original parts left on them .
In fact many are data plate projects - new builds . So in reality absolutely no provenance in the airframe at all.
Thats a whole other can of worms though
However, and again just my opinion, an airframe that is fairly original even if it is a collection of mostly original parts is historically more valuable than a data plate rebuild and should be treated as such.

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

Hey Cam,
I really like that approach. "Custodians of a piece of history."
Unfortunately it's not the outlook of the masses, even though ownership is always a transitory thing.
I too would like to see a hurricane without a spinner and a Ham. Stand prop sticking out front. For that matter I'd love to see a Corsair in FAA colours with four inches chopped off each wing tip to square 'em off. I love your Finch, and I think I'd also like to fly in a Hurricane

When it comes to Warbirds, the golden rule is always "the one with the gold, makes the rules."

Andy Scott

Andy how true how true
Totally agree with you as I stated above also

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

So you must really like Reno!

There are two. The aircraft at Rockcliffe and the Flying Heritage Collection Hurricane XIIa. However, the FHC aircraft, while restored in very accurate RCAF markings, does not have accurate markings for that airframe. For some reason they painted up a XIIa as a XII. And, yes, they need to take the spinner off... (Though it was not as unusual as some think to see RCAF Hurricanes, especially birds at the OTU, with spinners.)

I too would love to see the VWC Hurricane in HWE RCAF markings without a spinner, but then again, I'll be near the front of the line to pay for a ride if they choose to make the conversion.

Jim

LOL Reno is entertaining but not too interested in historically accurate restorations
Not sure of the attrition rate ie: aircraft losses as compared to the airshow circuit but
ofcourse there are lots more airshows compared to air races

_________________
...it was a plane adrift beneath the moon moving serenely thru beams like an angel of the night .....fair as a song ........aloof from mortal dreams

it would be a great asset to the warbird community.

The hurrican has a steel tube fuselage with wooden stringers to build out it's shape. All this material can be saved and the tow place materials made from scratch. I do have two suggestions
1) The two place Spitfire has has a weight limit in the rear cockpit of 200 lbs. plus or minus.
The T-Hurricane should have a goal of 300 lbs for the rear. You can't imagine how heavy AMericans/Canadiens are now. Add camera equipment and you're at 300 lbs.

2) Second, make it a true "T" in function. I've flown both the TP-51 and the TF-51, both cockpits. You really can't do P.I.C. work from the rear of the TP. In the TF, the student can taxi, land, everything. The seat is a few inches higher. It also has a full set of standard controls and brakes. Suggest bringing it up to the standard of a rear cockpit in a T-28 or T-34.

"Our motto at VWoV has always been "To Educate, Commemorate and Inspire". So far I've always found that if you take someone up in these aircraft, actually go flying, you achieve that goal in a way, and to a level, far beyond expectations.

After giving many many rides in the P-40 and other vintage aircraft, I can say for certain that it's a wonderful privilege to be able to share them. Sharing is far better than being observed from the ground. But the hard realities are all about costs, and that always rules, so we'll have to wait and see."

I agree with Dave's comments above, especially that I very recently had the priviledge of sitting behind him in the P-40 on our attempted Nov. 11th mission (weather caused us to abort). The view from inside is a whole other thing than watching from the ground (though I love watching from the ground too).

I'm on the restoration team for the MKXII so I don't know that I 100% agree with Dave on how easy it'll be to put the second seat in, but we'll see if the final call is made to go ahead. Someone said that the parts could be saved and put back to reverse the process. This is true except for the wood. We've already tried to remove the turtle deck and it's coming off in pieces due to the plywood being glued on. However, the plywood is relatively easy to replace. The only unfortunate thing is that we can't do this without changing the appearance of the plane, unlike the P-40 which still looks original.

In terms of the CG, John did some figuring on this as well after we found W&B data for the type. John's figures also indicated that we'd be close the back of the envelope but within it. There is also a 30lb ballast weight in the tail that could be adjusted if required.


Terry