Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Tue Jul 08, 2025 9:27 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 2:36 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 8:03 pm
Posts: 1081
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
There's a third Canadian-marked Hurricane out there...Mk.XII 5418 at the Reynolds-Alberta Museum in Wetaskiwin AB wears the late-war green/grey camo with C-type roundels on the sides, and no spinner. When completed years ago it was reportedly flyable, but was not flown; the engine was test run though. Nice machine.

S.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 2:42 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 8:03 pm
Posts: 1081
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
...Really putting the cat among the pigeons, I'll suggest another possible choice VWoC could make in pursuit of a two-seater fighter to supplement the Kittyhawk. How about turning the Mk.IX Spit project into a "Grace T9"? The engineering for that has already been done and several successful conversions made during restorations...besides which, the Spits are dual control, not just passenger-capable...

S.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 3:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 669
Location: Aerodrome of Democracy
I like Steve's idea slightly better but am still an advocate of restoring and representing the aircraft as it actually was.
Two seating a Spitfire makes more sense and VWC could offer rides and Spitfire Training as is done at Duxford
Would be a more viable way to make money

Terry confirms that two seating the Hurricane would alter its appearance so IMHO this would not be accurately educating anyone.
True it is always a pleasure to share the flying experience with others but it should not be done by sacrificing historical accuracy.
We have two many examples of our Canadian History already being "modified " so that todays generations are not getting the true picture.
I am a supporter of VWC and the aircraft are theirs to do with how they wish but if one of the VWC mandates is to educate then it should be done fully and accurately.
Yes taking a person for a ride in an aircraft is educational but it should not be at the expense of modifying an historical aircraft into something it is not . It sets a bad example about the importance of restoration, preservation and respect for the artifact itself. Not to mention the reputation of the organization.
At present VWC is only toying with the idea. As Dave H said they are trying to come up with ways to generate revenue. I fully sympathize with them and the many other collections that are in the same boat and wish all nothing but success.
Steve T's idea may just be the better idea.
I sure the powers to be at VWC will really look into all of this very carefully before making any rash decisions.

_________________
...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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 9:53 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:38 pm
Posts: 2662
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Doing some rough calculations, If you take the 30 lbs of ballast out of the tail, you would be able to add more than 60 lbs to the second cockpit/ mid fuselage area. The original IFF equipment is another 40 lbs. that could be removed from the tail. The pilot's armor plating weighs 70 lbs. but would move the C.G. in the wrong direction. The oxygen system can be removed, and the battery compartment can be put forward of the firewall if not already.
"Stay green,and growing like a plant, or die" Ray Croc, founder of MacDonalds restaurants. The revenue from the world's only two seat Hurricane could bring in enough revenue to help pay to restore the Spitfire at a faster rate.
Fleet16B made an eloquent argument. However, there really aren't any two place Spitfires available for rides in the western hemisphere, only TF-51s. whether it is this one or another, a two place Hurricane would create more interest and might spur more rebuilds to airworthy and also recoveries from Russia, etc.
Look at the insatiable worldwide demand for P-51's.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:02 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:26 pm
Posts: 2052
Location: Creemore Ontario Canada
tacoope wrote:
"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.

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.

Terry


Any chance of a photo or two of some of these VWoC projects? Maybe help illustrate the space in question on both the Hurri and the MkIX

Andy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 8:14 am 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:33 pm
Posts: 4707
Location: refugee in Pasa-GD-dena, Texas
Quote:
Terry confirms that two seating the Hurricane would alter its appearance so IMHO this would not be accurately educating anyone.
True it is always a pleasure to share the flying experience with others but it should not be done by sacrificing historical accuracy.

I wonder how many former Hurricane ground crew/ from WW2 are still with us these days? They gotta be in their 80's and 90's. I wonder if they would refuse their first Hurricane ride because their "purist" psyche just wouldn't let 'em get past the fact that RCAF 5447 never before had a second seat in her and she looked a little different? Or that she was the wrong color? Too bad this isn't 10 or 20 years ago...I bet a bunch of 60 and 70 year old veterans would be lighting up this thread to sign up.

Youse guys have a chance to have the only 2-seat Hurricane on the planet in almost 70 years...nobody has had the privilege of being a passenger in one since then....and yer clucking no???? :shock:

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 3:07 pm
Posts: 48
DH82EH wrote:

Any chance of a photo or two of some of these VWoC projects? Maybe help illustrate the space in question on both the Hurri and the MkIX

Andy


Look at the blog entries on the right. Once you click on a blog item, you can continuously click on "OLDER POST" in the lower right corner".

http://www.vintagewings.ca/Home/tabid/4 ... fault.aspx


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 11:13 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:31 pm
Posts: 1672
Here's a photo taken from the VWoC blogspot. It's taken looking up into the "fastback" portion. As you can see, it's an empty plywood shell.

Image

It's difficult to photograph the portion below that, within the metal framework of the fuselage, where the passenger would sit. Here is part of it. It is crisscrossed swith bracing wires. This bracing function would have to be reproduced by alternate means if a pax seat was there, probably by gussets and "knees" (boatbuilding term).

Image

Terry, thanks for the words about our flight together. (I still owe you some stick time.) Regarding the 30 lbs of ballast, that's good news indeed. The only concern is that the C of G not move too far forward when flying solo (remember the aeroplane is nose-heavy at landing), but of course we could secure a ballast-package in the back seat for solo flight that has the required result.

Blogspot http://vintagewingsofcanada.blogspot.ca ... te_20.html

Dave


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 669
Location: Aerodrome of Democracy
Dave
Thanks for posting the pics , gives everyone a better idea of the proposal.
What are the thoughts on the passenger being able to see outside?
Skinning the doghouse with plexiglass or just installing a small window ?

_________________
...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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:14 pm
Posts: 669
Location: Aerodrome of Democracy
airnutz wrote:
Quote:
Terry confirms that two seating the Hurricane would alter its appearance so IMHO this would not be accurately educating anyone.
True it is always a pleasure to share the flying experience with others but it should not be done by sacrificing historical accuracy.

I wonder how many former Hurricane ground crew/ from WW2 are still with us these days? They gotta be in their 80's and 90's. I wonder if they would refuse their first Hurricane ride because their "purist" psyche just wouldn't let 'em get past the fact that RCAF 5447 never before had a second seat in her and she looked a little different? Or that she was the wrong color? Too bad this isn't 10 or 20 years ago...I bet a bunch of 60 and 70 year old veterans would be lighting up this thread to sign up.

Youse guys have a chance to have the only 2-seat Hurricane on the planet in almost 70 years...nobody has had the privilege of being a passenger in one since then....and yer clucking no???? :shock:


Valid point about the vets wanting a ride in a Hurricane and many many vets have been taken for
rides over the years. I have flown many myself.
However the other side of the coin is that we owe it to these vets to commemorate them by preserving
and accurately portraying these aircraft as tributes to their service and sacrifice. There in lies the true mandate of these collections. Unfortunately as has been stated revenue often dictates over mandate and accuracy .
A sad reality but it has been proven time and time again that these issues can be solved by other means.

One question should be asked. If the majority of money was being generated thru rides.( which most collections say is not the major revenue source) then maybe aircraft capable of carrying passengers should
be acquired instead of jeopardizing authenticity.
This thread has been a very good discussion and it will be interesting to see where VWC goes with this proposal.
The biggest hurdle may yet to come.
As Dave H has stated it may not be feasible due to safety and insurance may be another issue.

_________________
...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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:33 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 9:33 pm
Posts: 4707
Location: refugee in Pasa-GD-dena, Texas
fleet16b wrote:
One question should be asked. If the majority of money was being generated thru rides.( which most collections say is not the major revenue source) then maybe aircraft capable of carrying passengers should
be acquired instead of jeopardizing authenticity.

I still don't see a "permanent" jeopardization of authenticity here. There is nothing that appears to suggest the aircraft couldn't revert to stock at some point in its later life. There is a possibility to display an extinct modification of the Hurricane...dunno if I'd count on it as a major source of cash influx, but it's sure nice to have the only one on planet Earth!

As for buying another one to generate ride revenue, well there goes the budget! :D :D :D

Nice chat Cam, keep up the good work!

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 7:43 pm
Posts: 331
Location: Ottawa
It may not be the only one there has been mention of Hawker Restorations converting a Mark 1 to a two seat configuration. Anyone else heard this?

_________________
“Try to fly in the middle of the air. The edges are filled with mountains and oceans and rocks and it’s much harder to fly there.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 10:34 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:38 pm
Posts: 2662
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
It's not like the conversion of the P-80 into the T-33 , or the A-4 into the TA-4 , where they grafted a huge section into the fuselage and greatly increased the length of the canopy.
There were three or more squadrons that did the conversions in the field, in a war zone, during combat operations, right? Would be a good idea to glean the existing photos of those aircraft to find clues of what they came up with in the field.
Last, I believe there is a 28gallon/168 lb. fuel tank in the fuselage forward of the instrument panel. Could this be enlarged? If enlarged and filled it could offset the weight/C.G. of the second seat. This fuel could be held as the flight reserve. Additional fuel could be carried in the wings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:20 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:13 pm
Posts: 5664
Location: Minnesota, USA
marine air wrote:
It's not like the conversion of the P-80 into the T-33 , or the A-4 into the TA-4 , where they grafted a huge section into the fuselage and greatly increased the length of the canopy.
There were three or more squadrons that did the conversions in the field, in a war zone, during combat operations, right? Would be a good idea to glean the existing photos of those aircraft to find clues of what they came up with in the field.



Precisely...no compromise in historical authenticity...straight from the theater of operations:

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/lendlea ... ricane.htm

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 2:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 10:28 pm
Posts: 455
Location: New Zealand
Yes I say do it. If it gets a veteran who flew or maintained one up in a Hurricane I'm all for it. And if it looks a little different than a single seater, well people can be educated about the two seat Hurricanes that did operate during the war now cant they? And while we are talking about authenticity pretty sure all those two seater Spitfires aren't wearing the right paint schemes (oh dear god I'm talking about paint now..... :roll: )


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Vital Spark and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group