|
|
Post by SEAN on Mar 25, 2011 13:29:31 GMT 12
Found this in the latest edition of Australian Defence Magazine:  |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 25, 2011 17:35:08 GMT 12
Thanks for that Sean. What is a realistic price for a complete but non-airworthy Devon, I wonder?
|
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Mar 25, 2011 19:30:50 GMT 12
"Delivered 1952-55. Ferried from United Kingdom to New Zealand" That's a loooooooong ferry flight. I know it is for the whole fleet but the phrasing makes it sound like that was the timespan for the airframe under discussion  |
|
|
|
Post by Damon on Mar 25, 2011 19:42:52 GMT 12
Does anyone have an idea on the condition of these airframes/engines up for sale? The ad says NZ1806 is derelict! On looking at Gavin Conroys recent photos of Woodbourne Inst. airframes 06 looks anything but derelict.Are they planning to sell any others?
Anyone want to go halves?!
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Lewis on Mar 26, 2011 7:50:58 GMT 12
I saw these two aircraft parked out at Woodbourne in January this year, alongside the Whitehawk line. They look (externally) to be quite complete and in reasonable condition. Woodbourne 9Jan2011  |
|
|
|
Post by Medic1nz on Mar 26, 2011 10:36:27 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by oggie2620 on Mar 26, 2011 11:18:12 GMT 12
Would be interesting to know why they arent airworthy...Has someone pinched the engines or is just because they had been left to rot?
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Lewis on Mar 26, 2011 12:08:33 GMT 12
Apart from anything else, its often the case of a lack of mandatory modifications on that airframe.
I know that one of the ex-RNZAF Devons bought by Culhams back in the mid-70s had only delivery hours on it as it had been held as a reserve aircraft. To get it airworthy would have meant updating the airframe with 25 years of mandatory mods. An expensive exercise.
These two last flew in 1980, so they'd probably need a bit of an update as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Mar 26, 2011 12:13:21 GMT 12
Interesting that they call NZ1805 "derelict by 1983" but don't say the same thing about NZ1806 when they both seem to have stayed together?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 26, 2011 15:26:24 GMT 12
Oggie they don't fly because they were Instructional Airframes. That means hey used used to train ground trades with, and are therefore no longer legally aircraft, and therefore they do not fly. They were ground runnable however, as part of the training for groundies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deane B on Mar 27, 2011 10:45:05 GMT 12
Having worked on and around these aircraft for 7 years, I can tell you that these aircraft are in very good condition and admired jealously by the Warbirds guys for that fact. I do not know, what (if any) mandatory mods are required to fly these on the civil register, but given that there were two ex-RNZAF machines flying, I'm not sure there is a lot.
These instructional airframes would not require a lot to get back flying as both the engines and airframes are in great condition - stored inside and in a very dry environment. The critical work would be probably be propeller overhauls and flight controls would need recovering.
Dave - I'm not sure there is such a thing as "not legally aircraft". Sure they are retired and currently not-airworthy, but they still have all their "bits" and serial plates.
|
|
|
|
Post by classicman on Mar 27, 2011 15:17:06 GMT 12
If we can dig aircraft out of swamps and glaciers and get them flying again, I'm sure enough cash and will power could get these old girls in the air again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 28, 2011 12:05:00 GMT 12
Deane, we were taught at No. 4TTS that once an airframe was converted to become an Instructional Airframe it is no longer an aircraft and will not fly again in RNZAF service under RNZAF law. After disposal from the RNZAF I'm sure they can become flyable again. I was referring to why they were not flyable in RNZAF service.
This law of course has been broken in the past, Shamus was showing me yesterday a Hind that became an Inst and then reverted to flying and then became an Inst again. But there was a war on back then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Mar 28, 2011 14:46:11 GMT 12
I truely hope someone or some group buy at least one of these and gets it airworthy and keeps it in the country.
The RNZAF historic flight are getting one airworthy too are they not?
|
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Mar 29, 2011 18:45:09 GMT 12
I truely hope someone or some group buy at least one of these and gets it airworthy and keeps it in the country. The RNZAF historic flight are getting one airworthy too are they not? Yes the Historical Flight have one to fly once it is overhauled. I think it is on the civil register? Might be wrong about that though.  |
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Mar 29, 2011 18:57:45 GMT 12
Deane, we were taught at No. 4TTS that once an airframe was converted to become an Instructional Airframe it is no longer an aircraft and will not fly again in RNZAF service under RNZAF law. After disposal from the RNZAF I'm sure they can become flyable again. I was referring to why they were not flyable in RNZAF service. This law of course has been broken in the past, Shamus was showing me yesterday a Hind that became an Inst and then reverted to flying and then became an Inst again. But there was a war on back then. No problem , just swap data plates - job done ! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by mit on Mar 29, 2011 20:53:21 GMT 12
I truely hope someone or some group buy at least one of these and gets it airworthy and keeps it in the country. The RNZAF historic flight are getting one airworthy too are they not? Yes the Historical Flight have one to fly once it is overhauled. I think it is on the civil register? Might be wrong about that though. ZK-DVN |
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Mar 31, 2011 15:38:13 GMT 12
Thanks Mit the old memory aint bad after all! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by tbf25o4 on Apr 5, 2011 14:53:37 GMT 12
Dave,
on the question of Instructional Airframes returning to active flying, that is why I wrote a new policy for the "INST" airframe serials in the mid 1990s. we changed to adding a "G" to the serial i.e. NZ6374G to indicate is was for ground instruction. This allowed all appropriate paper work to be retained with the airframe et al, so that if in the future it was to be returned to flying status there was no great paper trail or policy work to be undertaken, just the removal of the "G" from the serials on the aircraft and obviously ensuring all mods etc were updated.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by tbf25o4 on Apr 5, 2011 14:57:33 GMT 12
Greetings,
Re the registration of NZ18?? as ZK-DVN on the civil register wef 13/12/2010. My guess is that it is easier to have it maintained as a civil DH104 rather than maintaining it to RNZAF requirements which would require fixers to be current on that type of airframe. There is an established maintenance programme for the civil dove/devon fleet which can take care of that aspect for the RNZAF. It is noted that ZK-DVN is the only de Havilland Devon C1 on the register.
Paul
|
|
