Mike wrote:
Probably more accurate to say 'it had the same tail number as one of the actual Mustangs Robin Olds flew in WWII.'
That's a matter of interpretation.
I fly military airplanes currently, and while they are *in service* I have seen that they get massive rebuilds, both structural and superficial, all the time. The T-38 fleet I fly has had re-skinning, re-winging, longeron replacement, re-engining, new intakes, new nozzles, complete cockpit overhaul and avionics change, and many variations of those modifications in between. The serial number painted on the tail and printed in the aircraft forms never changes throughout these upgrades, modifications, and replacements -- even when the airplane used to be a T-38A or B, but is now a T-38C. No military aviation enthusiasts ever deem it necessary call these aircraft "the one that used to be T-38 66-1357". The airframes keep the same identity regardless of how much metal is the same on it as when it left the Northrop factory (that percentage is probably pretty low).
So why is it that when a major rebuild occurs *after* a military airplane has left military service that some warbird people start to question the authenticity of an aircraft's identification? Remember, these aircraft probably had similar rebuilds while they were in military service, too. You are correct that many warbirds -- Mustangs especially -- have questionable identities. These are airplanes that on *paper only* have a particular identity. This aircraft is not one of those, even though this fuselage has different wings, different skin, and is in a different configuration from when it rolled out the factory (again, I reference some T-38s I fly which have had very nearly the same things done to them...).
So, back to the original point. You're right -- if your definition of the originality of a warbird rests on the actual metal in the aircraft, then perhaps the percentage of metal in the Shuttleworth Mustang that actually flew in combat over Germany is low...say 10% even. Does it really make it a different aircraft?
I don't happen to believe that way, in any case, based on my experiences with current military aircraft.