I'm going to take a chance and try to ask a question here

[Randy Haskin]

Considering the fact that 30 years ago the entire flyable warbird fleet was forecast to be grounded by 2010

We have it on pretty good authority that between the oil companies no longer making avgas and the insurance companies no longer insuring warbirds, that there are actually no flying warbirds today.

[avenger2504]

I've just bought an Auster (a civilian J5F) and I was chatting to the previous owner about the Gipsy Major engine. he said it was a fairly simple engine why cant the serious restorer rebuild it. An aircraft engineer with us mentioned that as it was used in quite a few varied types and the design authority was held by Rolls Royce it wasn't going to happen in the foreseeable future and they would have to be rebuilt by an authorised facility. At least in NZ and Australia. So in some cases it might not be are their engine around but will you be allowed to overhaul one. Then the re tape war starts.

[Jeff Nelson]

Thanks, Mudge. I am honored (truly). I'm always amazed at how many "Mudge the ...." you come up with.

I'm of the opinion that, at some point, we'll see more kits or replica builds, particularly when the cost of true warbirds gets really out of sight. The Flugwerks 190 is just one example. How about a Beaufighter or ME-110, or maybe a Mosquito? The engines will continue to be an issue. Possibly an eastern European country will step up and build replica engines that will be happy on less than desirable fuel....

[Ploesti]

What's interesting to me is the fact that as the years pass and warbird restorations continue, I find that many completed projects could really be classified as replica's as opposed to restorations. I think in years to come as more warbirds take flight, we will truely be looking at a replica as opposed to a restoration. I believe I read in an older thread a debate about what constitutes a restoration vs. replica. if an aircraft is completed with all new parts and a dataplate is added what do we really have? Not that I'm complaining, but how do you really feel when you see one of the FW190 replicas flying? personally I have mixed thoughts because I know it's not the real deal, but I wonder how many P-51's are in the same category? A few P-51's I've seen have been completely rebuilt from the ground up, very little if any original parts. Again not being negative or disappointed. Something to be said about an original warbird vs a replica. that being said, bring on the replica Typhoon, 110, Stuka, P-43, Val, Kate etc. etc.

Just make sure their to full scale, I have no interest in these 3/4 scale replica's

[Obergrafeter]

The Eastern European thing might work, The Poles had maufacturing rights to the Franklin engine and were going to start manufacturing them. Only problem they were bought by Rolls Royce and there in the Franklins were stopped dead in there tracks. RR woulldn't let them manufacture (Liability problems) and would not sell to a willing US buyer (liability problems) I don't get it. I would think you would sell the LIABILITY Problems with the manufacturing rights. Lawyers chime in.

[Ploesti]

I would think you would sell the LIABILITY Problems with the manufacturing rights. Lawyers chime in.

Absolutey true

[Mudge]

As far as replica vs. restoration goes, I would, of course, like to know when I'm seeing a replica and when I'm seeing a restoration. That said, I'm not gonna' get all hissy and say, "eeewww, that's a replica. What's it doing here?" I just like to see the different makes/models fly. I get pleasure from seeing what they looked like "in the day". Yeah, we've seen 'em in museums but, it goes without saying, it ain't the same.
Some of youse troops have seen the FW-190 replica fly. I haven't.
I'd love to see a FW-190, Ju-87, Me-262, BV-222 ( ), Typhoon, Beaufighter, Sunderland ( ), Val, Kate, and others, too numerous to mention thunder past. Obviously, ain't gonna' happen, but you get the idea. I just love the sight and sound.

Mudge the nostalgic

[Ploesti]

I think in this day and age the possibility of new restorations of orginal warbirds becoming a reality are more rare than the aircraft we would like to see fly again. There are only so many out there to restore. I think in the years to come we will possibly see examples of rare WW2 aircraft take to the sky, but only as replicas. And if these replicas are as close as possible to the originals then I'm fine with that. You really have to think about most warbirds flying today, just about everything on them is new. So where do you draw the line when determining what is restored and what is a replica? I'm not convinced a dataplate is enough.

Thoughts?

[Ploesti]

A question: take the Chino airshow this year, what was more interesting to you? the replica 190 or an original zero? And what are your thoughts on a Buchon painted as a 109? I know this has been covered before but where do you stand on authenticity? Where do you draw the line? I'm probably wandering a bit for this thread but I'm sure you all will get it.

[Mudge]

A question: take the Chino airshow this year, what was more interesting to you? the replica 190 or an original zero? And what are your thoughts on a Buchon painted as a 109? I know this has been covered before but where do you stand on authenticity? Where do you draw the line? I'm probably wandering a bit for this thread but I'm sure you all will get it.

See my previous post re: restored vs. replica.

Mudge the succinct

[Ploesti]

See my previous post re: restored vs. replica.

Mudge the succinct

I did see that, but I'm thinking others may chime in as well.

[Ploesti]

I saw this stat on another website and found it interesting.

P-51 Mustang Survivors (324)

Flying (166) Display (57) Restoration (66) Storage (24) Unknown (11)

66 in restoration? Hmmm! Does that sound right?

[51fixer]

I saw this stat on another website and found it interesting.

P-51 Mustang Survivors (324)

Flying (166) Display (57) Restoration (66) Storage (24) Unknown (11)

66 in restoration? Hmmm! Does that sound right?

What does UNKNOWN get you?
We have a whole bunch of parts, old, new and in between. Perhaps that should be 12!

[ZRX61]

A question: take the Chino airshow this year, what was more interesting to you? the replica 190 or an original zero?

Personally I'd say the 190, Zero's just don't do it for me, they look like they'd fall apart if you sneezed too close to one.

[T-28mike]

I know of several owners that are holding on to or seeking out airframes that are either proven combat vets and / or (preferred) un-molested all original component airframes... that is an airframe that has most or all of it's completely original components (excepting rotables) with little or no damage history, in original condition. The reason being that they feel an un-damaged original airframe (with all of it's own original parts) will eventually be more valueable than a data plate rebuild... If it is a combat vet with it's un-molested original parts then it may indeed be priceless to the true collector when the market becomes over saturated with aircraft that are "restored" original aircraft (which are 50% or more new or post production parts and material). Kind of like Washingtons hatchet......