|
Post by jp on Feb 27, 2014 17:19:56 GMT 12
Pretty sure it used to have Mainfreight sign written on it - though I think the actual colour scheme was as purchased?
|
|
|
Post by jp on Feb 16, 2014 21:59:51 GMT 12
Airforce/govt funding? Seriously?
One Mosquito costs more than the Govt got for selling an entire strike wing.......
|
|
|
Post by jp on Feb 16, 2014 11:47:11 GMT 12
Suthg - I didn't take exception to the post about the Tempest - or intend to imply that there aren't plenty of other worthwhile projects that need funding. The reason I highlighted the Mosquito is its NZ provenance - this forum is full of comment lamenting our aviation heritage disappearing overseas - ex Motat Corsair, various P-40's, Chino's Dauntless, etc., often due to lack of foresight when there is an opportunity to do something about it. Another obvious example is John Smith's Mosquito - unless he already has made arrangements for its eventual disposal, sooner of later it will appear on the market, and in all likelihood disappear overseas to be restored as a generic MK VI... imagine how much cooler this would be in a conserved (rather than restored) original condition sitting in the atrium of the RNZAF museum - but plans and arrangements need to be sooner, rather than later.....
On a completely different note, seeing as the film making/remaking topic keeps coming up - why are we panning old movies like 633 Squadron so much? Admittedly, the acting and special effects are a dismal, but at least a lot of the flying is real.... To me, the original Dam Busters is superb - real Lancasters, low level flying - Peter Jackson's version will have better effects, but the flying will all be CGI....
Apologies for the novel.......
|
|
|
Post by jp on Feb 15, 2014 15:35:52 GMT 12
While I'd love to see an airworthy Tempest, I think a genuine ex-RNZAF Mosquito has more significance to NZ aviation than a Tempest II....
|
|
|
Post by jp on Feb 14, 2014 20:09:01 GMT 12
I know I started this by suggesting Sir Peter could buy this aircraft, as he is the only NZ aviation enthusiast wealthy enough to fund this I could think of off the top of my head, but listing movies he could make/remake with it is putting the cart before the horse...........
|
|
|
Post by jp on Feb 12, 2014 18:13:02 GMT 12
Someone ring Peter Jackson - its fabric covered wooden construction will fit in well at the TVAL...
|
|
|
Post by jp on Nov 12, 2013 6:02:37 GMT 12
wouldn't they already have plans? they have done 1/48 and 1/72....
|
|
|
Post by jp on Nov 10, 2013 22:05:58 GMT 12
Hope they do a B.XVI/B.35......
|
|
|
Post by jp on Aug 21, 2013 18:10:54 GMT 12
Apparently there's one in storage at Ardmore - Avspecs have (had?) the propeller of one hanging on the wall in their hangar......
|
|
|
Post by jp on Aug 20, 2013 22:16:48 GMT 12
Looks like a fantastic museum - especially like how they manage to fit a lot of exhibits in, without making it look like they were wedged in with a crow bar..... plenty of space to view each aircraft.
|
|
|
MOTAT
Aug 14, 2013 18:15:23 GMT 12
Post by jp on Aug 14, 2013 18:15:23 GMT 12
I'm now thoroughly confused - not sure why anyone would want to rationalize the collection to be purely military, or purely civil, nor paint one to represent the other - why not call it an aviation collection, and accept it for what it is - a somewhat eclectic collection of aircraft with a NZ link?
As for the gap left in the representation of the FAA by the removal of the Swordfish, surely that will more than filled with the Avenger?
One point that should be weighed up with replicas: (apart from the cost in dollars, materials and time in their construction) - the cost of housing them. If you weigh up the cost of the building ($18.4 million) and divide it by the number of aircraft housed in it, it probably costs in the vicinity of half a million bucks per aircraft to put a roof over its head - on that basis, the quality of said replica would have to be pretty high to justify it's inclusion!
|
|
|
MOTAT
Aug 12, 2013 21:49:27 GMT 12
Post by jp on Aug 12, 2013 21:49:27 GMT 12
I don't think you can call it a military aviation museum - it has one of the largest collections of civil aircraft in the country..... I haven't done a count, but the numbers of civil v military aircraft must be roughly 50:50? And if we are going to start calling it a military aviation museum, could we at least paint the military aircraft in something other than a gloss finish?
|
|
|
Post by jp on Aug 4, 2013 12:34:23 GMT 12
Nice paint scheme - love it!
|
|
|
Post by jp on Aug 4, 2013 12:06:50 GMT 12
I agree whole heartedly with Shorty - replicas that bear little more than a passing resemblance to what they are trying to portray, don't really belong in a museum. Whilst reproductions built to the standard of TVAL (for example), using original construction techniques, materials, and in many cases, incorporating original parts/engines are nowadays the only realistic way to fill gaps in museum collections, bashing together something to look approximately similar to the original thing, however good the intention, does little other than dilute the overall quality of the exhibits of the museum. As far as the swordfish is concerned, I will be glad to see the hangar space used for something more worthwhile, and its not as it MoTaT doesn't have plenty of other projects that could better use the manpower devoted to the building, cleaning, and maintaining of replicas.
Dave - I'm not intended to belittle the efforts of the NZ FAA - just actually devoting the resources to a real Avenger, rather than a replica Swordfish, is to me, a better use of resources. As for the relevance of aircraft flown by kiwis, remember its a museum of transport and technology - the kiwi connection isn't necessarily relevant - otherwise, there would be a good argument for replacing the Lancaster with a Cessna 172, as probably more kiwis have flown in one of those.....
|
|
|
Post by jp on Jul 27, 2013 9:25:59 GMT 12
suthg: from what I've read, it's highly unlikely Kermit Week's MkV will ever fly - (unless he on sells it). Apart from the fact that progress on the restoration appears to be glacial, and although to an airworthy standard, he has no intention at this point in completing systems etc once its finished to static standard. Given that a lot of his aircraft have been airworthy at some point (B-24, B-26) and have never flown much more than ferry flights to the museum - don't hold your breath!
Don't get me wrong - along with an airworthy Mosquito (done!) seeing an airworthy MkV Tempest is my own Holy Grail - but wishful thinking isn't going to get it to happen....
|
|
|
Post by jp on Jul 12, 2013 23:28:16 GMT 12
try the Wix site - I think there is a new thread about this on there?
|
|
|
Post by jp on Jul 12, 2013 23:25:59 GMT 12
Why are the standards they are built to unacceptable? inaccurate, or not air worthy?
|
|
|
MOTAT
Jul 6, 2013 15:18:35 GMT 12
Post by jp on Jul 6, 2013 15:18:35 GMT 12
Thanks Alan
|
|
|
MOTAT
Jul 4, 2013 18:18:49 GMT 12
Post by jp on Jul 4, 2013 18:18:49 GMT 12
So...just reading July's issue of NZ Aviation News and it says that the only aircraft outside now are the Ventura and Lodestar. DC-3 and Sunderland inside then?
|
|
|
Post by jp on Jun 22, 2013 13:50:37 GMT 12
What was wrong with the original green/grey colour scheme?
|
|