Mark Allen M wrote:
Great job, it I’m starting to lean more towards “replica” than “restoration” over the past several numbers of years. Really just how much original makeup do these pristine warbirds truly have?. Data plates alone have never convinced me of a true restoration. And not even a few original parts and pieces convince me. It may have started as a pile of “combat veteran” junk out in the islands in the South Pacific, but there isn’t much (if any) “combat veteran” to it now. Looks all brand new to me. As with so many others out there flying.
Owners can call them anything they wish, it’s theirs to label, their money and their egos. Me? Just my thoughts and opinions.
Though the warbird community will recognize these as replicas, the general public will likely assume they are the actual aircraft that have "been there and done it". It does make me feel a bit uncomfortable with the obvious sin of omission when these aircraft are displayed, but I also think it's a transient phase. In the classic car world, originality has already become widely recognised, with unrestored vehicles often having a higher monetary value than those which have been restored. The cultural value is likewise skewed.
For me, a more honest way of dealing with this subject in the warbird world would be to display the original airframe (or wreckage) alongside the replica.
Nevertheless, for me this is 100% a razorback P-47 and it's great to see another one in the air. (it's still too shiny)