|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 4, 2012 22:00:40 GMT 12
"Changes made in preservation are subtracting from the artefacts history and originality"
The way I see it, the most important part in this aircraft's history since it was grounded and left to rot in a Canadian paddock is the ADDITION of artefacts that will once again make it a complete and original aircraft that can fly, rather than a rotting wreck. Noty many historians or anyone else would have given a monkeys' about it before it was rescued for restoration as it was in such a poor state.
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jun 4, 2012 22:35:46 GMT 12
I think we can all agree that the efforts by the teams here in NZ are superb. With a deteriorated wooden fuselage you really do need to start afresh sometimes. I worked for an organisation in the UK that had an historic Tiger Moth among other aircraft. Indeed we had many Moths and I was there doing my 'wood and fabric' ratings, - Group 3 on the Airframe licence.
For what was possibly the most well known Tiger in the world it would have been very much a balancing act. The battle between having a flyable asset available to the members and a historic museum piece.
The end result was the proverbial grandfathers axe and far from a showpiece.
No doubt the time will come when it may benefit from a full going over and retirement... if it hasn't already happened.
To me as an IA the aircraft is more about conformity than history. The data plate and up to date logbooks are a good starting point. The aircraft has to conform to the design specs obviously but with the inevitable mods and improvements. All approved and appropriately recorded.
I am just wondering how many Mosquitos will get the treatment... more than a few I imagine.
|
|
|
Post by JDK on Jun 4, 2012 22:57:27 GMT 12
"Changes made in preservation are subtracting from the artefacts history and originality" The way I see it, the most important part in this aircraft's history since... And there's the nub, Dave. 'Since'. Now, personally, I entirely agree with you that this Mosquito's history is entering a new phase which will be of greater significance as a rare (probably unique for some time) flying example. But in one set of strict historical terms, it's history is behind it, with this era being as a preserved artefact. I was being a bit disingenuous in that I suggested that post-service events aren't the thing's 'history'. Many artefacts have a post-service or preservation / survival history that's as interesting and packed with event - history - as what it originally went through 'in service'. The recognition of this as also being the artefact's history is a welcome development, as is recognising that things like intangible heritage* and demonstrating with artefacts (flying the historic machines) in a previously much narrower version of history. baronbeeza pus his finger on a tricky element too. Something like a civil Tiger Moth may still be doing what it always did; training pilots and providing fun flying. It can therefore be argued that that history, into what's normally regarded as preservation, is still ongoing. (And the maintenance and certification it works to is different, but aiming for exactly the same objective, that it's safe to use for the purpose.) Of course one has to recognise that the training and fun flying undertaken in a Tiger today are driven by nostalgia, or heritage interest, not because a Tiger's the best trainer we have still (aside from some specialist roles, where it has much merit) or because economics makes a forty year old 172 the current preference - still. Interesting discussion. *http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=34325&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
|
|
|
Post by JDK on Jun 4, 2012 23:02:41 GMT 12
I think we can all agree that the efforts by the teams here in NZ are superb. I've seen a lot of 'superb'. I've seen all the Mosquitoes likely to fly again, and the last flier when it was flying. (More importantly, I've been lucky to talk to most of the people who made those things 'so'.) I've seen some of the world's most remarkable restorations and flying aircraft, many of them unique in a number or significant ways. Gathering data and measuring and comparing are three of the things in aviation preservation that fascinate me, and why all of the above experience have occurred. This rebuild is unique, and defines one corner of the envelope of restoration achievement. To say the guys have done a job to a standard is true, but inadequate. To recognise they've done something unparalleled, without peer, is the point. Regards,
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jun 4, 2012 23:05:47 GMT 12
And Grandad's axe is still Grandad's axe even after a new head and three new handles.
No different really from a Spitfire II that gets a new mainplane and then is re-engined to a Mk.Va
|
|
|
Post by John L on Jun 5, 2012 0:17:55 GMT 12
Not having a dig JDK - I reckon it's worth the effort - an aeroplane not flying, is somehow, incomplete - if it entails an all new rebuild to get it back in the air - so be it. The lifespan of any mechanical contrivance, can often be measured by the work done on it, from minor changes at service time, to total rebuild after a major.....The more complex the plane, the more complex the rebuild, and the boys out at Ardmore are certainly up there with the best.
Without Glynn's magnificent effort and dedication, however, this rebuild may never have come about. A lot of people forget that.
|
|
|
Post by Radialicious on Jun 5, 2012 1:06:04 GMT 12
Jon raises a good point. We sometimes need reminding of the work of in my opinion, the king of the Kiwi shed, Glyn Powell. I seem to remember that I was a teenager when NZ Wings magazine published an article about Glyn and his plans to build a Mosquito. If I remember correctly, the question was asked, "how long will it take?". "Hopefully within my lifetime" was the answer. That is sure to be satisfied thanks to the work since carried out by the guys at Avspecs. On the day that the Queens Birthday honours list is released in NZ, I'll be raising a pint to people like Glyn who work below the surface to achieve what will in the months ahead, suddenly receive the worldwide attention he deserves.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 5, 2012 8:19:45 GMT 12
I agree completely with you Al, but would like to point out his name is Glyn, not Glynn. Here's the card he gave me on my recent visit?
|
|
|
Post by Radialicious on Jun 5, 2012 9:27:50 GMT 12
Cheers Dave, I did wonder about the speelling…. I saw some photos posted online by Avspecs recently that showed the restoration over the years. They paid a good tribute to Glyns work in the early days and showed just how far this machine has come.
|
|
|
Post by baz62 on Jun 5, 2012 12:59:12 GMT 12
Must....................not.........................point.........out..................Al's.......spelling.... .......................mistake..........................arrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh (sound of brain flying out of left ear and hitting wall)
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 5, 2012 13:35:41 GMT 12
No problem Al, it is unfortinate that Glyn's name is so often spelled wrongly, even in the popular press. i just thought I'd mention it.
|
|
|
Post by Brett on Jun 5, 2012 16:39:02 GMT 12
<snicker>
|
|
|
Post by lesterpk on Jun 5, 2012 19:43:33 GMT 12
Honest question here, since there are no current Mossie rated pilots in the world, who will be doing the test flying? Someone rated on similar performance twins?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 5, 2012 19:54:14 GMT 12
I don't know if that is for public consumption yet, but I have been told who - two well known and very experienced warbid and airline pilots will do the test flying programme. Joe Smith may be able to confirm if the names can be released.
|
|
|
Post by joesmith on Jun 5, 2012 22:13:36 GMT 12
I don't know if that is for public consumption yet, but I have been told who - two well known and very experienced warbid and airline pilots will do the test flying programme. Joe Smith may be able to confirm if the names can be released. Not for public consumption yet as first flight is a little way off and personal schedules may dictate availability. The test pilot/s will be one of the three very competent musketeers. But rest assured it will be no surprise Joe
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 5, 2012 23:00:17 GMT 12
Cheers for that.
|
|
|
Post by lumpy on Jun 5, 2012 23:50:59 GMT 12
if it entails an all new rebuild to get it back in the air - so be it. Please dont take me wrong , Im as keen as anyone to see an airworthy Mossie , and firmly believe the skills and deterimation to do that far exceed those required to build them originally but I dont think you can use terms like " all new " and " rebuild " and " It " in the same sentence . " It " sugests an identity ( Im good with that ) , as does " rebuild " but there will never be an air worthy Mosquito that is " all new " ( lots of metal in a wooden aircraft )
|
|
|
Post by JDK on Jun 6, 2012 12:19:51 GMT 12
Jon raises a good point. We sometimes need reminding of the work of in my opinion, the king of the Kiwi shed, Glyn Powell. I was at pains to specifically mention Glyn in my earlier posts several times. Spelled 'Glyn' correctly now, too. (Dave didn't mention that he got the business card and I didn't!) ;D Regards,
|
|