Cowboys & Indians- that Banana Spitfire

Bagsie I get the silver one!

Zwitter. TD248 has changed hands and is now repainted in conventional late war markings.

The photo in the link shows TD248 ( Pilot Cliff Spink?) chasing MH434, piloted by Ray Hanna at DX October 2005. Note the Squadron codes are Cliff’s initials.

TD248

“There will be some inevitable comparision of this aircraft with the quality of restoration done in the west. But it has to be remembered that the entire restoration of the Spitfire was done completely on a voluntary basis by the men of 41R&SU and at ‘zero’ cost. i.e. all the material used in the activity was surplus and would not have been put to any other use. Considering that fibreglass Spitfire replicas in the west can sometimes go into six figures (in dollars), having a near-complete spitfire with a iron-clad provenance at no-cost is a bargain any day!

And the whole process has not only preserved the original wreckage – but also the amazing story of MV459’s discovery for days to come.”

I think the quote above explains eloquently enough why this Spitfire has not reached the same standards as those in the west. They have done their best with absolutely nothing in the way of resources.

In the ‘Spitfire rich’ environment we live in it seems somewhat absurd to me that people are happier criticising than praising the efforts of 41RSU for what they have actually achieved. I wonder whether European restorers efforts would be any different if they had similar resources and finances to the team in India?

Regards,

kev35

With respect Kev, I’m not buying that line. They clearly had enough material to “fill in the gaps”, and the meanest amount of research would have given them the correct shapes (nose profile and cockpit area being the most obvious failings). They finished it, but it’s completely the wrong shape. I may be missing something, but how would striving for an accurate shape use up more money or manpower? The only thing it might take more of would be time. If that was for some reason an issue, then fair enough. The failure here would appear to be in the amount of research undertaken – could this not have been done beforehand? I realise that it’s easy to criticise from our “first-world” position, but I don’t see why anyone else in the world shouldn’t hold themselves to some very basic standards. It is, of course, theirs to restore as they feel able and see fit. But when you put yourself and your work in the public domain, you must expect criticism. I hope they and others take it on board and learn from it. As someone said, it’s entirely possible to improve upon it in future; perhaps these guys were indeed working to some imposed deadline… in which case, well done. If time was not an issue, then… much of the criticism here and elsewhere is justified, I’m afraid.

TD248 I’d like to introduce you to TD248.

Bagsie I get the silver one!

“There will be some inevitable comparision of this aircraft with the quality of restoration done in the west. But it has to be remembered that the entire restoration of the Spitfire was done completely on a voluntary basis by the men of 41R&SU and at ‘zero’ cost. i.e. all the material used in the activity was surplus and would not have been put to any other use. Considering that fibreglass Spitfire replicas in the west can sometimes go into six figures (in dollars), having a near-complete spitfire with a iron-clad provenance at no-cost is a bargain any day!

And the whole process has not only preserved the original wreckage – but also the amazing story of MV459’s discovery for days to come.”

I think the quote above explains eloquently enough why this Spitfire has not reached the same standards as those in the west. They have done their best with absolutely nothing in the way of resources.

In the ‘Spitfire rich’ environment we live in it seems somewhat absurd to me that people are happier criticising than praising the efforts of 41RSU for what they have actually achieved. I wonder whether European restorers efforts would be any different if they had similar resources and finances to the team in India?

Regards,

kev35

TD248 I’d like to introduce you to TD248.

We’ve done this one at great length previously and IIRC following a debate about the banana thingy.

lol! Actually i came across a bit of TD248, ebayed it and it went to AA on the Isle of Wight!

I think maybe the IAF needed a Spit Haynes Manual!

TT

TD248 I’d like to introduce you to TD248.

We’ve done this one at great length previously and IIRC following a debate about the banana thingy.

I’m getting confused now,the quote from red 964 has got mixed up with my reply to him and it now looks like I’m asking the questions and giving the answers at the same time !( clearly as anyone who knows me will no doubt say that is something I’m not capable of doing!) I’m sure its all been done before, but clearly we’ve nothing else to be doing!

Q: Do all the bits that all the resto shops junk when they ‘restore’ an aircraft go in the scrap bin or back on museum aircraft never likely to fly again? do they exchange the next best and recycle the fleet.?

TD248 I’d like to introduce you to TD248.

We’ve done this one at great length previously and IIRC following a debate about the banana thingy.

Only if we’re trying make this a widdling contest, and (I hope), we’re not.

Well I’m not – saving that for this evening apres pub!

Just trying to make the point that we in Britain are not innocent of maltreating airframes either – we should look over our shoulder before we start bashing others for crimes that we have all at some point been guilty of.

Restoration is a funny old business and I don’t pretend to understand it. I do, however, feel that if we must criticise the efforts of others it ought to be done constructively rather than just to say “worra pile of…”

Adrian

Hi Stuart,

I was told once that with one type of Bugatti car there are more around today than were actually built in the 20’s! Whats has allegedly happened is as parts were junked during restoration, other collectors have aquired them and based new restorations on the junked parts.

I also spoke with a Tigher Moth owner/restorer who had a full kit of parts, upon contacting the Moth Club in order to establish its identity he was informed that the fuselage’s id was already a flyer, and the wings belonged to an example which was approaching first flight.

Makes you think.

Steve.

Steve, another comparison is the manx Norton (motorbike) 490 were made 500 survive!! (figures not accurate but distorted out of all proportion to emphasize point) I have to put my hands up and say that on the subject of recycling Spitfire parts, I am as guilty as anyone; original parts will make up about 50% of my project ,some of which were removed from airworthy A/C, however not enough from anyone specific A/C to endanger the provenance (or undermine its owners claim that it is what the serial no. says it is.) I used to think that it was a crying shame that A/C were left in dusty museums when they could be out there flying, and giving enjoyment to all, but you have to take the view that with all the alterations and new build parts in flying A/c together, with the unfortunate accidents in recent years and the subsequent loss of A/C, that, perhaps the safest place is under all that dust !

Spot on, Steve! How many dataplate restorations are there out there? I’ve no doubt some of them are beautiful things but are they really an original Spitfire/Hurricane/whatever?

And whether you like the banana Spitfire or not is our record in Britain whiter-than-white? You only need to look at the Southend Lincoln, the Beverley at Hendon, Bedsheet Bomber… You could put up a decent argument that the first two of those are/were considerably more important than another Spitfire! Much as I love them, there are plenty to go round. The Lincoln is one of just two and has spent years rotting outdoors in a heap, while as for the Bev…

Adrian

Yes, but (and without wishing to offend) so what? How does “our” record, for better or worse, affect how another country’s citizens carry out restorations of historic aeroplanes? Only if we’re trying make this a widdling contest, and (I hope), we’re not.

Spot on, Steve! How many dataplate restorations are there out there? I’ve no doubt some of them are beautiful things but are they really an original Spitfire/Hurricane/whatever?

And whether you like the banana Spitfire or not is our record in Britain whiter-than-white? You only need to look at the Southend Lincoln, the Beverley at Hendon, Bedsheet Bomber… You could put up a decent argument that the first two of those are/were considerably more important than another Spitfire! Much as I love them, there are plenty to go round. The Lincoln is one of just two and has spent years rotting outdoors in a heap, while as for the Bev…

Adrian

Hi Stuart,

I was told once that with one type of Bugatti car there are more around today than were actually built in the 20’s! Whats has allegedly happened is as parts were junked during restoration, other collectors have aquired them and based new restorations on the junked parts.

I also spoke with a Tigher Moth owner/restorer who had a full kit of parts, upon contacting the Moth Club in order to establish its identity he was informed that the fuselage’s id was already a flyer, and the wings belonged to an example which was approaching first flight.

Makes you think.

Steve.

QUOTE]
I think that much of the airframe parts removed from restorations to fly are held onto by the respective restorers ,not quite sure what to do with them; some are kept as patterns, but I think in some cases to use the original stuff in a static would highlight just how little originality the “new” restorations actually have.[/QUOTE]

A lot of it ends up in the skip,for exactly that reason.

Dave

hehe, I think they’re sold on eBay, aren’t they?

Q: Do all the bits that all the resto shops junk when they ‘restore’ an aircraft go in the scrap bin or back on museum aircraft never likely to fly again? do they exchange the next best and recycle the fleet.?[/QUOTE]
I think that much of the airframe parts removed from restorations to fly are held onto by the respective restorers ,not quite sure what to do with them; some are kept as patterns, but I think in some cases to use the original stuff in a static would highlight just how little originality the “new” restorations actually have.

AAAhaa

“AAhhaa! But will it be at Legends 2006….?” 🙂

But this is the way they do things in many Third World Countries.
Colin

….. that are thinking about spending £20 billion on Eurofighter…..

I was at the IAF Museum in Delhi a few days ago. All in an excellent museum, although several photographs were mis-labeled!

I understand that the IAF are in the process of building a new museum in Delhi, which will no doubt be the catalyst for a national search for suitable exhibits, hopefully leading to an improvement in the quality standards for restoration work.

Many of the historic buildings in India are falling apart… what chance to you give the historic aircraft?

Everybody has to start somewhere!

I think it would have been better if it had been left in bits instead of badly mocked up. As it is you cannot see what is original and what isnt (bar the obvious) so their efforts obviously centered on they making it look like it was a complete genuine aircraft.And that is where the problem lies, there efforts center on making it look ‘great’ when it so obviously isnt and didnt need to be.

Personally I think it would have been far more reflective of that spitfire’s story to simply host/preserve the dried out remains as found.I think the story of finding it, or how it got to its final place and its active life is far more informative/unique than to have yet another spitfire to gaze at.

Sure at some point in the future someone will probably get hold of it, junk the junk, junk the original bits and build an entirely new one, and that is probably no better.

Q: Do all the bits that all the resto shops junk when they ‘restore’ an aircraft go in the scrap bin or back on museum aircraft never likely to fly again? do they exchange the next best and recycle the fleet.?

I tend to agree. Either display the remains, preferably with some sort of conservation effort, and tell the story of that aircraft, its pilots, ground crew and squadron: Or do a complete number on it so that its at least representative of the Spitfire as a type, can be used to tell people there about their country’s and the Commonwealth’s role in WW2, and will last that much longer. This Frankenstein’s monster serves neither purpose, and to congratulate the “restorers” in a condescending “ah, bless, at least they had a go” way, doesn’t do anyone any favours. I don’t need to go into some of the superb restoration efforts undertaken elsewhere with near-zero cash and manpower. Why should it be any different in this case?

I think it would have been better if it had been left in bits instead of badly mocked up. As it is you cannot see what is original and what isnt (bar the obvious) so their efforts obviously centered on they making it look like it was a complete genuine aircraft.And that is where the problem lies, there efforts center on making it look ‘great’ when it so obviously isnt and didnt need to be.

Personally I think it would have been far more reflective of that spitfire’s story to simply host/preserve the dried out remains as found.I think the story of finding it, or how it got to its final place and its active life is far more informative/unique than to have yet another spitfire to gaze at.

Sure at some point in the future someone will probably get hold of it, junk the junk, junk the original bits and build an entirely new one, and that is probably no better.

Q: Do all the bits that all the resto shops junk when they ‘restore’ an aircraft go in the scrap bin or back on museum aircraft never likely to fly again? do they exchange the next best and recycle the fleet.?

did the same chaps paint PT462? 😉