Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: TwinEng on August 16, 2009, 10:40:53 AM
-
Which of these two planes do you like to fly?
This photo was taken at an airshow this summer. Looks like a few German warbirds are still going strong:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3584/3826775184_187e6d1a69_o.jpg)
Pretty gorgeous sight, no? Just look at how close they are flying. Although the telephoto lens that was used does make them look closer than they really are.
--
-
Neither is German, per se. The 109 is actually a Spanish built Buchon HA-1112, powered by a Merlin. The 190 is a replica, and that carburetor inlet in the upper deck and longer nose indicates a different powerplant than the BMW radial.
Gorgeous photo though... :)
My regards,
Widewing
-
do you have a hi ress photo i could use as a desktop?
-
Neither is German, per se. The 109 is actually a Spanish built Buchon HA-1112, powered by a Merlin. The 190 is a replica, and that carburetor inlet in the upper deck and longer nose indicates a different powerplant than the BMW radial.
Gorgeous photo though... :)
My regards,
Widewing
Yup.. just doesn't look like a photo to me
-
The 190 is a Flugwerke built replica with a Russian built engine. The only original 190 part on it is the tail wheel
-
Well heres what I saw looking out the window of my car at work the other day.
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/airshow2009.jpg)
-
The image looks stretched in the horizontal.
-
Isn't that one of the main 109's used in the movie Battle of Britan?
-
Isn't that one of the main 109's used in the movie Battle of Britan?
Yea I was just thinking that too, they always looked a little out of place in that movie. Would have to to say the fake 190 though. :aok
-
Would have to to say the fake 190 though. :aok
The 190 is a Flugwerke built replica with a Russian built engine. The only original 190 part on it is the tail wheel
-
The 190 is a Flugwerke built replica with a Russian built engine. The only original 190 part on it is the tail wheel
on that note, there is an fw190 in restoration in kissimmee florida.
i think it will be the only original 190 in the air? but i'm not sure......
-
There is more than one 190 only 2-3 air worthy 109s the battle of Britain movie featured Spanish built 109s had a larger nose section
-
the front cannons on the 109 looked out of place int there on 3 guns on a 109 without gondola sometimes or is it just a different version?? just wondering great picture by the way :aok
-
the front cannons on the 109 looked out of place int there on 3 guns on a 109 without gondola sometimes or is it just a different version?? just wondering great picture by the way :aok
If you're noticing the guns (of which there seem to be two installed above the engine) and not the big ugly air intake for the Merlin engine.... :D
It's a Spanish-built Hispano Aviacion Ha-1112 Buchon... based on the Bf 109G, produced under license from Messerschmitt.
There is more than one 190 only 2-3 air worthy 109s the battle of Britain movie featured Spanish built 109s had a larger nose section
Including Buchon's there are still 13 airworthy 109's according to the list of surviving 109's on Wikipedia.
-
i think it will be the only original 190 in the air? but i'm not sure......
There are several 190 restorations in the works.
-
I can't stand the look of those Spanish 109s.
-
gimme the 190, replica or not.
-
There are several 190 restorations in the works.
Here is one it's a FW 190d-13.
(http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/fw190d13reffw_5.jpg)
-
Yup.. just doesn't look like a photo to me
Why would anyone ever bother to paint a picture of REPLICA planes flying in formation??? That would make no sense whatsoever.
It is a photo that I just happened to find on the Internet on a photo website.
It is too bad that the planes are not the real thing. I thought that they both looked rather odd.
--
-
I would rather fly the Spitfire which is stalking these two, you can't see it because it's just out of frame. :cool:
-
I would rather fly the Spitfire which is stalking these two, you can't see it because it's just way out of frame. :cool:
:aok
-
I would rather fly the Spitfire which is stalking these two, you can't see it because it's just out of frame. :cool:
cough spitdweeb cough cough :noid :lol
j/k
-
Actually they're both chasing a run 'n' gun Mustang from 2K back. In about five minutes he'll be over his ack and they'll get proxied.
-
I would rather fly the Spitfire which is stalking these two, you can't see it because it's just out of frame. :cool:
now see, there's your problem. the spitfire is stalking them.
if there were a p38 there, they'd be wreckages on the ground already. :aok
-
I would rather fly the Spitfire which is stalking these two, you can't see it because it's just out of frame. :cool:
If I were in a 234, I'd fly under and pop up infront of your stalking business and pop you and save my fellow countrymen. :P
-
Fake or no fake, great to see that shape back in the air. :aok
-
I don't understand this word 'fake'.
-
make a copy of with the intent to deceive = "fake"
-
Here is one it's a FW 190d-13.
(http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/fw190d13reffw_5.jpg)
That aircraft was purchased by another entity and is not undergoing a restoration to fly.
-
I don't understand this word 'fake'.
I don't either. Almost all warbirds flying today would be considered fakes if people really knew the limited amount of original material used to rebuild them. It is the nature of the beast.
Use a word like replica to describe a new build. It is more descriptive and is less abrasive. Fake implies that people are trying to "pull one over" on the public. That is not the case.
-
That aircraft was purchased by another entity and is not undergoing a restoration to fly.
AFAIK the goal of the most recent restoration which was completed in 2004 was to bring the plane to flying condition. It just haven't been flown.
-
AFAIK the goal of the most recent restoration which was completed in 2004 was to bring the plane to flying condition. It just haven't been flown.
It is not in flying condition nor does the current owner intend for it to fly. It can and does run, but will not fly in it's current state.
-
The 190 is a Flugwerke built replica with a Russian built engine. The only original 190 part on it is the tail wheel
Yup its an FW body with a Lavochkin heart. The engine is a latter day version of the Ash 82 FN.
-
It is not in flying condition nor does the current owner intend for it to fly. It can and does run, but will not fly in it's current state.
"With so few Fw 190s still in existence and none currently flying, it is heartening to see that the restoration of Doug Champlin's ultra-rare Fw 190D-13 to airworthy condition is well under way."
"Although Champlin's Fw 190 will be restored to airworthiness, it will not be flown. "The one thing that was holding this plane back from flying was the prop hub. As it was, the engine could be run, but the prop was fixed pitch. We'll substitute a D-9 hub so that the engine can be run to full power and the prop pitch can be changed." Some of the fiberglass items that had been added to represent a complete airframe have been reproduced in metal. The vertical tail's leading edge and some fuselage doors have been reproduced to German specifications and are operated by one locking fastener in the middle of each plate. New, bulging cannon breaches have been made, and there will be copies for the Air Force's Focke-Wulf to improve its appearance."
Source: Focke-Wulf 190D restoration on Flight Journal's June 2002 issue
-
Believe what you like Wmaker, it's not as though I know what I am talking about. :rolleyes:
BTW, Champlain does not own the aircraft, nor has he for a couple of years.
-
Believe what you like Wmaker, it's not as though I know what I am talking about. :rolleyes:
Hmm...why do you have to act like that? If you have some better info on the restoration why can't you just share it instead of rolling eyes? Are you saying that Mr. Champlin, Goshawk Aviation and that particular reporter all lied?
BTW, Champlain does not own the aircraft, nor has he for a couple of years.
Yep, doesn't revert the restoration that was done on the aircraft while he still owned it, though.
-
Wmaker,
It was not coming off on anything. You cut and pasted something as though it refuted it. Several of the warbird magazines are full of misquotes, lies, and outright fabrications. Why? Because it sells. I could point to many issues in the last five years, but choose not to because I do not need another character assassination attempt from an editor that we went around with several years back that cost far too much in legal fees to get damage undone.
As for the D-13, we did not restore that aircraft, but know most involved in it, and their words are that it was not intended to fly otherwise several issues would have been addressed. Further backing this up was the new owner inquiring as to an estimate of the cost of making it fly with another restoration source.
Again, as I said before, believe what you like, I am tired of the cut and paste mentality of seemingly "proving" a point.
-
You cut and pasted something as though it refuted it.
Actually, I didn't think either way. I just wanted to show you one of the sources that had given me such an idea. And after that I was hoping you would tell me your view of the matter. It just seems that, with you, there's usually at least one post of eye rolling and attitude before you can decent down to among us mere mortals who aren't airplane repair men and tell how things really are. :D
Again, as I said before, believe what you like, I am tired of the cut and paste mentality of seemingly "proving" a point.
Yep, I'll do just that and I guess I just have to believe that Mr.Champlin and Mr.Crandall are telling the truth instead of you.
Jerry Crandall:
Thanks for your nice comments and encouragement on the D-13 project. It is a lot of work! It is over 100 degrees F inside the building where we are working. We have only been here for four days!
Let me give you some brief background information...the D-13 was originally restored in the early 70s to the best of their ability at the time. A lot of systems and details were improvised due to the lack of original parts and capabilities of the restoration facility at that time. In January 2001 Doug Champlin gave the go ahead to Dave Goss and his team at GossHawk Unlimited facility in Mesa to tear it all apart and start over, doing it 100% right! It has been a very expensive proposition, searching the world over for the correct parts and details such as latches, pumps, parts for the engine, and a lot of ther things that needed to be replaced and/or remanufactured.
Some parts are still missing, such as the correct propeller hub that would have the hole in it for the cannon blast tube. No one has been able to find one in all these years, so the existing hub actually belongs to a D-9, which is a solid type. The fueslage has been re-skinned, at least partially. The Belly pan that originally was wood on the D-13 has been replaced with a metal panel for preservation reasons; however, some of the other fuselage panels have been correctly re-fabricated in a plywood as were the landing flaps.
Doug was very concerned to correctly match the color and luster of the new paint job, and make sure it was not overall glossy like the first restoration. The paint is an automobile acrylic paint that has a hardening agent. Each one of the colors, such as RLM 76, RLM 82 and RLM 75, RLM 83 were produced in such a way as to match the luster of the original paint. RLM 82 has a little more luster than RLM 83 and so on. AS a result, it will not be glossy like most museum restorations. The overall luster will be a semi-mat or egg shell just like the original paint.
The national markings - "Yellow 10" and the stab markings look beautiful and accurate. I was delighted today that I was able to add the word "Kommodore" to the lower radiator cowling. My first inclination was to make it more professional looking, but as we studied the photos and enhanced them by computer, we realized the word was crudely applied and all the circular letters were filled in with black.
Doug does not want to fly the a/c as long as he owns it. In fact he directed that the engine be sealed up and that no fuel should be put into the system due to long term anti corrosion prevention. Therefore he will not even allow the engine to be started at all.
Tomorrow we apply the little bit of stenciling that we think was showing through the camouflage paint and it will be pretty much finished except for the installation of the canopy and the propeller with spinner. The interior and fuel system is still not complete but it will be in the next few months.
As I was working on this a/c today, I felt I was doing it on behalf of all modelers and enthusiasts throughout the world...I only wished we could have all been together to experience this occasion together.
Cordially,
Jerry
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=23015 (http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=23015)
-
just to get my 2 cents in on the Champlin Fw190-D13 http://www.gosshawkunlimited.com/restoredaircraft/fw190d/fw190dhistory.htm The D13 is now located at the Seattle Museum of Flight
-
I apologize I posted wrong. The Fw190-D13 did not go to the Seattle Museum of Flight when it bought the Champlin Museum in 2000. It is in Paul Allen's Flying Heritage Collection. It will fly, although, it is such a rare example that the risk of crash is too great. http://www.flyingheritage.com/
My apologies
Flushed on AH2
-
Not originals, nor are they the bastard children of originals...not sure why they need those swastickas, but whatever...
-
FYI, from the owner's website.
This airplane has been restored close to flyable condition, but it will not be flown because it is such a rare example of the Fw 190 line.
http://www.flyingheritage.com/TemplateHome.aspx?planeId=4
If you will look closely at the freaking quote, you will see the words This airplane has been restored close to flyable condition. It is not a flyable aircraft, nor was it intended to fly again.
-
Yep, I visited that page yesterday aswell. But Bodhi, isn't it you who's now cut-pasting to prove a point? :D
Bodhi,
usvi mentioned this particular 190 in the page two of this thread:
Here is one it's a FW 190d-13.
(http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/fw190d13reffw_5.jpg)
...to which you replied...
That aircraft was purchased by another entity and is not undergoing a restoration to fly.
From this post of yours, at least I got the impression that there would be a need for another "ground-up" restoration to get it to flying condition. Because I had read that it was already finnished to flyable status, I posted...
AFAIK the goal of the most recent restoration which was completed in 2004 was to bring the plane to flying condition. It just haven't been flown.
I don't know but considering the "close to flyable condition" -comment, I'm guessing it doesn't need "a restoration to fly" based on the restoration that it already gone through 2002-2004. Bodhi, if you've seen the inquiry regarding the cost to get it to flying condition you'll probably know what it would take but I'm guessing you can't disclose such information from such an inquiry. Would be really interesting to know. I just might shoot an e-mail Flying Heritage and ask about this. All in all, it seems that "the flyable status" for a warbird like this seems to be somewhat subjective term. Of course, after 5 years sitting still an aircraft would require quite a few checks before flying, especially an aircraft of this complexity.
Another "cut 'n paste" (this is where I read about it first):
Goss and Champlin expect to be finished with the airplane early next year. Although the fighter will be perfectly flyable, Champlin says that as long as he owns it, Yellow 10 will remain earthbound. “It’s just too rare,” he says. “We’ll start it up and taxi it, but that’s all we’re gonna do. It’d just be criminal to fly it.”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200206/ai_n9113861/ (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200206/ai_n9113861/)
(The above quote is dated before that Crandall's quote on my previous post. I guess Champlin's mind changed regarding running the engine.)
-
Wmaker,
What really gets me, was that in trying to be nice and pass on some information that was not being recorded correctly by a variety of sources, I get told I am wrong regarding information I KNOW to be correct. That's just plain and simply wrong. My point of trying to pass the information on was one of being kind and passing on a bit of "inside" info that was passed through the community to me, by friends in our business. Instead, imho, I get confronted by someone, who in a very uppity manner, incorrectly tries to correct me by quoting a news article.
I really meant what I said wmaker. I do not care whether you believe me or not. What I do take issue with is the manner in which you feel you are going to swipe my statement aside without ever having been involved in this business. That's why, I am taking this stand.
-
(http://www.cindycraig.net/images/Pink%20Purse%20Fight.jpg)
-
Ok Bodhi, I dont think there's much hope in real communication here...I'll just leave it at that.
My personal interest is on the aircraft itself which I personally find to be one of the most interesting warbird restorations in existence.
-
I just wanted to show you one of the sources that had given me such an idea. And after that I was hoping you would tell me your view of the matter.
Hmmm ... from what I read, he did give his view ... twice ...
That aircraft was purchased by another entity and is not undergoing a restoration to fly.
It is not in flying condition nor does the current owner intend for it to fly. It can and does run, but will not fly in it's current state.
It looks like you didn't like his "professional" view on the matter and tried to dispute it ... and now he's the bad guy ? ... too funny.
Had I not known that Bodhi has been deeply involved in the world of WWII Warbird restoration for years and probably has access to circles and information that only a very few have access to ... I might have questioned him too ... but that's not the case.
-
But Bodhi, isn't it you who's now cut-pasting to prove a point? :D
Bodhi restores warbirds for a living...
-
Bodhi restores warbirds for a living...
And? I'm well aware of that. Mr. Champlin owned the plane and Mr. Crandall has researched the plane since the 60's and was involved in painting it during the latest restoration.
Mr. Champlin oversaw the last restoration and said it was restored to flying condition. The current owner says it was restored close to flying condition. Bodhi originally said "it is not undergoing a restoration to fly" which at least to me gave the impression that according to him it would need a new restoration to fly which I found hard to believe due to the restoration done on 2002-2004 and the current owner's comment "restored close to flying condition".
I wrote a note to Flying Heritage, haven't gotten a reply yet.
-
Just checked my e-mail. Actually I had gotten a reply about 1,5 hour ago...
My original message:
Hello from Finland! My personal interest lies on the rare Fw 190D-13 "Yellow 10" in your collection. I've read from several sources stating that the aircraft was restored to flyable status between 2002 and 2004. Your website mentions the aircraft to be close to flyable condition. I was wondering from the technical stand point what kind of work is needed to bring the aircraft to full flying status. It's just a hypotetical question, I do realize that the aircraft will not be flown in the near future. I'm interested in the technical details of the latest restoration and what's holding the aircraft from full flight status. Looking forward for you reply, Joonas Konttinen
Reply from the Flying Heritage's curator:
Hello Joonas,
The short answer to your question is that no one really knows exactly what it would take to get the FW190D to flying condition. Yes, you are correct, the aircraft was restored to flyable status when Doug Champlin owned it. However, since the plane is the last of its type anywhere in the world, Champlin and our owner, Mr. Allen, have both chosen not to fly the aircraft. Since the aircraft has never really been readied for actual flight in modern times, it’s hard to say exactly what it would take. It would certainly need an annual inspection and major system review before any flight would be attempted. Basically, what is holding the aircraft back is not a technical issue, it’s one of historical value and the desires of its owner.
Thanks so much. I hope you get the chance to visit soon!
Cory
Cory Graff
Military Aviation Curator
Flying Heritage Collection
-
Great! That helps a lot.
Let me try and translate that Email for you.
That aircraft was purchased by another entity and is not undergoing a restoration to fly.
There we are.
-
Heh, Saurdaukar. :)
I think you need to brushup your reading comprehension a bit.
-
Heh, Saurdaukar. :)
I think you need to brushup your reading comprehension a bit.
Quite the opposite, actually. Reading what you want to read and reading what is written are two different things.
The short answer to your question is that no one really knows exactly what it would take to get the FW190D to flying condition.
Conclusion: Currently, the Fw190 is not in flying condition.
Yes, you are correct, the aircraft was restored to flyable status when Doug Champlin owned it. However, since the plane is the last of its type anywhere in the world, Champlin and our owner, Mr. Allen, have both chosen not to fly the aircraft.
Conclusion: At one point, the Fw190 was in flyable condition.
Conclusion: In the future, the Fw190 is not expected to be in flying condition.
Since the aircraft has never really been readied for actual flight in modern times, it’s hard to say exactly what it would take.
Conclusion: The aircraft has not been in flying condition for some time.
Conclusion: Currently, the Fw190 is not in flying condition.
It would certainly need an annual inspection and major system review before any flight would be attempted.
Conclusion: Currently, the Fw190 is not in flying condition.
Basically, what is holding the aircraft back is not a technical issue, it’s one of historical value and the desires of its owner.
Conclusion: As Bodhi stated, ownership has been transfered and there are no plans to restore the aircraft to flyable condition.
The letter you received verifies his statement as correct.
-
Reading what you want to read and reading what is written are two different things.
<sigh> Right back at you. You seem to forget that Bohdi denied that it was restored to flyable the last time around.
Conclusion: As Bodhi stated, ownership has been transfered and there are no plans to restore the aircraft to flyable condition.
I just can't see how making a systems check and clearing up any possible snafu's on the way and getting it through an annual inspection equals a restoration, something that the aircraft indeed went through 2002-2004.
Anyway, this is getting just plain silly...this thread reminds me of the fairy tail about Emperor's new clothes.
-
WMaker maybe you're misreading because of linguistic/cultural differences. Bodhi came clear to me from his first post, as to what he meant. What I'm curious is how you reconcile this inconsistency:
"The short answer to your question is that no one really knows exactly what it would take to get the FW190D to flying condition."
Then: "Yes, you are correct, the aircraft was restored to flyable status when Doug Champlin owned it. "
If it was restored to flyable, why does no one know exactly what it would take to get it there? Sounds like a misunderstanding. Which would fit with the below line:
the aircraft has never really been readied for actual flight in modern times, it’s hard to say exactly what it would take
-
Well, to me, that sounds quite normal considering the complexness of such aircraft. I know I would be biting my nails if it was mine when they would be starting it up for the first time even after all possible and needed checks would have been done three times over. The Jumo doesn't have the kind of infastructure and know-how around it today which more common engines of the warbird scene enjoy (Allison Merlin and P&Ws for example). There's of course always possibility for unexpected snafu's. So I would too be very causious in my speculations.
-
I am going to say this one last time, as this whole issue is really nonsense and I grew tired of dealing with it and people that have no clue as to what is entailed in a restoration.
Wmaker,
The aircraft had a major amount of restoration done, but contrary to popular opinion, it was not flight worthy after the second or first restorations. This popular opinion includes a lot of people that were actually involved in the restoration on both ends. There are issues, which I am not privy to, but I surmise from my discussions they are substantial. As the information was very proprietary, I did not push further.
Next, an aircraft that has not flown in over 60 years is going to take more than some rudimentary systems checks to get it running. A multitude of factors comes into play when an aircraft is to be flown, not the least of which will be the engine, but everything along the way through to the airframe and it's status after restoration and before. What kind of NDT was performed and was it done on critical castings and forgings? Was there any NDT performed at all?
I can not tell you how many times I have come along behind another restorer and found literally hundreds of issues. This isn't always the restorer's fault, as many issues could have been left out per owner request due to expense. That's the real crux of the issue. What did or did not the owner address? Not too many owners I know of are going to be willing to say they skimped when the sale of a $7 million aircraft is the case. It does happen frequently. I do not know nor do I care whether the previous owner did this or not. What I do know I mentioned above. As for the current owner, I am 100% confident that it is in good hands. This collection is one of the best in the world, and if the decision to restore it to it's former glory is undertaken, I know of very few people capable of funding such an undertaking.
Wmaker, I am at a loss for going any further with you. As mentioned above, I told you these things before, and my reasoning behind my statements. Please understand that while Mr. Graff is a "curator", it is my understanding that he is not a restorer. The two specialties are very different from one another. I would not begin to tell him how to take care of a piece of history outside aircraft, and I highly doubt he would do the same regarding aircraft with me.
Again, believe what you like, but please do not treat me as though I do not know what I am talking about. Lastly, this is the last I am going to comment on this subject. I am liable to say something that I am bound against, and I would rather not.
Thank you to those that stood up for me.
-
I wrote a longer reply addressing your points individually but Windows bugged out on me.
So a bit shorter version...
- I do agree this "issue" has become total nonsense.
- If I understood correctly, you said that you talked with the guys that restored the aircraft but that you didn't want to push that discussion to a direction where they would have had to say something they couldn't because of confidentiality?
- Because you originally said that "not undergoing a restoration to fly" I understood it would, in your view, need another restoration to fly. Did I misunderstand you?
- I guess there's a bit of a language barrier here regarding the definition and use of the word "restoration". The 17+ years that I've followed the warbird-scene I've understood that a restoration is something that was done to this particular aircraft for example 2002-2004 and that there are different kinds of goals for a restoration on different cases. I would imagine NDT-inspection would be part of the deal if the plane was meant to be finished to flyable status. I just can't understand how even disassembling already restored plane and its engine for thorough systems/NDT check up could be called a new restoration. If that meets the criteria of a restoration then I indeed am clueless regarding what a restoration entails but then so are many others aswell. Such heavy check up/meintanance is a lot of work and costs a lot of money but as far as I know, alone, it isn't a restoration. If there was something else that you can't spill the beans on, then so be it.
- It's great that there are people with means that are oriened and willing to preserve living history like this. And on top of that, ready to display it to the public aswell.
- If you change your mind and decide to reply, I think it's best to continue with PMs.