|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Feb 21, 2024 20:33:27 GMT 12
I was referring to an aircraft type. I did not know that the PC-9 has served in a war.
But, whatever... Another definition is a type that served in the military. Take that if you want it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2024 20:58:31 GMT 12
the DH112 Venom, DH115 two seat Vampire [...] have all served operationally at war in RNZAF hands. And the NZPAF's Avro 504 [...] all served in WWI. None of the NZ-based flying examples of these aircraft served in any war, and TVAL's Avro 504K was built after WW1. I don't believe either airworthy P-51D did either. Does this mean they are not warbirds? EDIT: I just saw your latest comment - that'll teach me for not checking for Page Two! In most quarters a warbird is defined as being an ex-military aircraft flying in civilian hands, generally in a military paint scheme. |
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Feb 21, 2024 21:41:38 GMT 12
So, none of the following RNZAF aircraft would qualify? Avro 504, Bristol F2B, DH-4, DH-9, Gloster Grebe, Auster J-5, DH-100, DH-104, DH-112, DH-115, DHC-2, EE Canberra, A-4s, BAC-167, Bell UH-1H, MB-339, T-6 Airtourer, CT-4B/E None of which "served in a war". Some airframe owners might heartily disagree with you, Dave. I do. To me, a warbird is any airframe that has worn uniform in military service. Just my opinion. Erm, the DH112 Venom, DH115 two seat Vampire and the Canberra have all served operationally at war in RNZAF hands. The RNZAF has also operated Austers and Iroquois in war zones, though not our ones, but our ones were actively preparing our aircrew for those operations. And the NZPAF's Avro 504, BristolF2B, DH-4 and DH-9's all served in WWI. Most of those post-WWII types served in the Cold War, which we were a part of. Really only the CT/4E is a post-Cold War machine. I take your point, though it was not well made. "And the NZPAF's Avro 504, BristolF2B, DH-4 and DH-9's all served in WWI." Not quite correct. It would be more accurate to say that all four were of WWI design. Those Bristol Fighter and Avro 504K batches supplied to the NZPAF in the mid-1920s were not even constructed during the war. Errol |
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Feb 22, 2024 8:30:54 GMT 12
Well, for my two cents worth, the original definition from the source of the term "Warbird" many years ago, (notably the Good Ol' US of A), is "...any aircraft type that has served with any military and is now or has been flown and owned by a civilian..."
Runs away................
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnsey on Feb 22, 2024 9:14:13 GMT 12
It'll be great to see this flying in NZ! A "reasonably cheap" warbird: Enough performance to keep it interesting, no need for live seats as the stall speed is low enough thanks to the straight wing, the Aussie big tyres allowing grass field ops and all the reliability of a PT-6 (when the ELU system works properly). I had a brief interest in possibly syndicating one, but the prices went a bit nuts with the US red air providers taking the good ones.
I flew this aircraft just once during my time instructing at 2FTS - 21 Oct 2002 1.4hrs teaching a Nav 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyingKiwi on Feb 22, 2024 18:42:19 GMT 12
Would be a good way to commute quickly around the country too, I imagine some will start to pop up in non-military paint schemes, if they haven't already.
Btw I would categorically not include the beloved Slingsby in my display picture as a 'warbird' but those markings did increase interest in it a fair bit...
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Lewis on Feb 22, 2024 22:16:15 GMT 12
As seen today at Ardmore  |
|
