Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:54 am
Mon Nov 17, 2014 10:24 pm
Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:04 pm
Nathan wrote:I see these Bushons have a lot of people worked up about them. Both on wix, facebook, and other forums. But dare I say Im not sure why people are so excited about them. They are not 109's, but Spanish build close copies with merlin engines. But I guess these are as close to a 109 you can get anymore. But still not 100% authentic. Just my 02$
Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:08 am
Thu Jan 08, 2015 4:57 pm
Nathan wrote:I see these Bushons have a lot of people worked up about them. Both on wix, facebook, and other forums. But dare I say Im not sure why people are so excited about them. They are not 109's, but Spanish build close copies with merlin engines. But I guess these are as close to a 109 you can get anymore. But still not 100% authentic. Just my 02$
Thu Jan 08, 2015 6:50 pm
Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:54 am
RobC wrote:I don't know why people get so wrapped up about The Buchon question, but it is not rational. It is a Buchon, but it is still a Messerschmitt. Putting a Merlin engine in it does not make it not a Messerschmitt.
Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:56 am
Milmart Militaria wrote:RobC wrote:I don't know why people get so wrapped up about The Buchon question, but it is not rational. It is a Buchon, but it is still a Messerschmitt. Putting a Merlin engine in it does not make it not a Messerschmitt.
I seem to recall some discussion / claim (at the time approx 1990's) about the Hans Ditttes 109 being as being a German production fuselage and not Spannish
Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:22 am
RobC wrote:I don't know why people get so wrapped up about The Buchon question, but it is not rational. It is a Buchon, but it is still a Messerschmitt. Putting a Merlin engine in it does not make it not a Messerschmitt.
Did the Beaufighter quit being a Beaufighter when they put Merlin engines in it?
Did the Spitfire quit being a Spitfire when they put the Griffon in it?
How about the DAP Beaufort? American engine and it wasn't even made in England! Yep, still a Beaufort.
Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:39 pm
DaveM2 wrote:The major point of difference is that all of those aircraft saw WWII combat, whereas the Buchon did not.
Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:10 pm
Dave Homewood wrote:DaveM2 wrote:The major point of difference is that all of those aircraft saw WWII combat, whereas the Buchon did not.
Most of the Mustangs and Flying Fortresses plus the Lancasters around the world also never saw any WWII combat. Who cares though? I don't. They represent a type that did see combat, and do a great job.
It's a lot like the Blenheim now flying from Duxford - it was built under licence in Canada as a Bolingbroke but it has been backdated now to a Blenheim Mk 1 (like the Buchons that are converted back to the earlier Bf109G design) and it represents the type that did see combat very well. No-one seems to complain about that, so why do people get their knickers in a knot if a Buchon is backdated to represent a combat veteran Bf109G? It makes the aircraft more interesting in my opinion and does no damage to it's own personal history.
Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:01 pm
Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:07 pm
Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:42 pm
Mon Oct 19, 2015 5:13 pm
Milmart Militaria wrote:Buchon is going to Ross Pay at Scone NSW