Does the airworthy preservation of historic aircraft end with the 60's?

I think motivations evolve over time, and this can drive surprising outcomes. I figure that most of the folks who fought in WW2 were happy to see the back of the aircraft that terrified them in a number of ways. It was folk that had never been strafed or surprised by shrapnel at 20,000 feet that brought the historics back to life, out of the wonder of it all. Could you imagine that your kids would one day pull scrap metal out of the ground and make it fly ! I think in 25 years time, when pilotless drones are ubiquitous, the idea that an actual human being sat in a cockpit will draw a new generation to the wonder of bringing such contraptions back to life. They will also have access to short run tools like 3D printing for once off parts and trick around ancient circuitry with computing devices that will be thousands of times as sophisticated as the oxidising things that are needing replacement. The biggest issue will be paying the Pollution Toll for pumping CO2 into the atmosphere, and getting past the demonstrators with the signs showing penguins choking under a dump and burn. They will all gasp when a re-enactor will light up a thing called a cigarette, then step into the cockpit and light up the afterburner.

By 2117 will that many people really care? There seem to be far fewer people among the younger generations interested in aeroplanes than when I was young, and I don’t see that situation improving. Go to an airshow and look around. Most of the camera wielding enthusiasts you see will be 50 plus.

It’s our own fault. As a movement we don’t go out and draw attention to ourselves. Look at the struggle Alf Tuppper had to secure only two cockpits, expenses paid, out of all those that exist for the event at Damyns Hall. Something like 20,000 people would have seen some aviation heritage and some could well have gone on to air shows and maybe volnteered at a museum or at a collection.

I know it was a fraud but the Wasp that travelled round Supermarkets was a classic example of what we shoul be doing, I saw it in Crawley Tesco car park and it was attracting a lot of people who wouldn’t have had any other exposure to aviation heritage.

You see lots of young people around other types of historic transport, I’m convinced that our issues are self inflicted.

As someone who spent my career as a sytems engineer working on modern aircraft flight control systems, Tornado and Typhoon in particular, as well as one-offs including FBW Jaguar and EAP, unfortunately I simply can’t see any way they could be operated in a preservation environment. The transition from mechanical systems to control systems requiring complex safety-critical electronic computing to remain in the air is just too fundamental IMHO.

Andy

Agree.

As someone who spent my career as a sytems engineer working on modern aircraft flight control systems, Tornado and Typhoon in particular, as well as one-offs including FBW Jaguar and EAP, unfortunately I simply can’t see any way they could be operated in a preservation environment. The transition from mechanical systems to control systems requiring complex safety-critical electronic computing to remain in the air is just too fundamental IMHO.

Andy

No-one mentioned the CAA and it’s various classes of jet sophistication?

I’d suspect the largest obstacle in the future will be the potential serviceability of the aircraft computers.

I was wondering that too. I would imagine neigh impossible to replicate an intricate and bespoke CPU.
If that is the case then flight unstable aircraft (if that’s the correct term) will not survive.

Red Bull has a number of Alpha Jets – so no reason why the contemporary Hawk shouldn’t be used in a similar way.

The Finnish AF could be a good source of airworthy Hawks. They have plenty of them. And they also sell to the open market.

Indeed. However, there aren’t many nations that sell their aircraft into the open market like the RAF do. There is another side to there being a good many Hawk operators; in that ex RAF machines will be a good and profitable source of spares..

Thanks Bruce, I didn’t realise that. Stony may have a point though!

Hawks will be out of hours by the time they are finally retired. They’ve already had the wing replacement programme, and the fuselage replacement programme.

There are more Hawks on this planet than the RAF ones…

Hawks will be out of hours by the time they are finally retired. They’ve already had the wing replacement programme, and the fuselage replacement programme.

Call me naive – I’m sure I will be – but I just don’t see what the CAA has to gain from shutting down operation of a section of aircraft types. I believe the reason the sole airworthy Hunter in NZ was grounded was because of running costs and possibly fatigue, rather than our CAA engaging in some vendetta against private jets. Strikemasters, L-29s and L-39s, Vampires and a Venom all fly the New Zealand airshow circuit quite happily and one museum is planning to restore and fly their Aermacchi MB.339CB – a type which entered RNZAF service in 1991.

The UK CAA doesn’t seem to have stopped all vintage jets from flying, only one type which suffered from a very public accident and large accident investigation/enquiry.

As far as future preservation and display goes, due to cost and complexity I can’t imagine seeing an F/A-18, Tornado or Eurofighter Typhoon being privately operated (that said, I look at Paul Allen’s MiG-29UB and wonder if I’m already wrong). But more practical types like King Airs could fulfil the role that ex-RNZAF Devons did in the formative years of the NZ Warbirds Association by ferrying crew and support to airshows, as well as indulging in a little display of their own. It’s possible helicopters could find a niche but I must admit the vintage chopper scene here and from what I’ve seen of the UK is very, very sparse – there’s that issue of money again – and I’m not sure how well Sea Kings would find work (Hueys and logging springs to mind).

Hawks could end up in private hands. Look at the Aero-Vodochody types around the world. Granted they were cheaper to acquire so it may be on a smaller scale, but imagine the opportunities if you bought a Hawk, painted it red and set up an adventure flight operation. The general airshow public likes speed and noise.

I doubt the late Cold War/Desert Storm/Kosovo etc types will ever appear on the scene in numbers like the Hurricanes, Mustangs and Spitfires, but I think some will.

I think the UK historic jet scene is being shut down by stealth by the CAA, who will claim they were only trying to ‘make it safe’ but either deliberately, or with indifference, imposed such onerous standards and endless costs, that most operators would be utterly discouraged. If you strangle the shows in red tape as well, then you cut off the income stream to support operation of historic aircraft.

The issue is that Historic jets are being operated at a cost that is far below what would have been spent on them in service. If you overhaul a piston engine such as Merlin or Allison, you also overhaul the carburettors, fuel pump and so on. There are enough organisations around to do this. At present, there are few, if any places left who will overhaul fuel pumps and fuel control systems as found in first and second generation jet aircraft. Yet, they continue to deteriorate – and whilst a design life may not have been specifically set, there was no expectation that they would still be in operation sixty or seventy years later.

If you want to see what it takes to fully overhaul a first generation jet engine, look at what FHC have been doing with Jumo 004’s. Just don’t ask what it cost.

As the responsible body charged with oversight of the industry, the CAA must act if it is concerned about standards. The wish to see these aircraft in flight cannot come before safety of operation.

Scotavia,
It’s always difficult calculating a true operating cost. Looking at that list, the metric is the TOTAL cost of ownership for that year (acquisition costs, spares, fuel, upgrades, repairs, pilot training, simulators, salaries for crews, engineers, hangers, runways, ATC, logistics support, project management etc etc etc) divided by the flying task in hours. We did it once for the UK Chinook and, depending how you viewed the figures, it was quite different. Add in all the “overheads” listed previously IIRC the cost per flight hour was around £18-20K, whereas just fuel it was about £5.5K per hour (and I had to fill one up on my own credit card once…..ouch..!!). FWIW I think trained, competent and demonstrably safe display pilots will also become a limiting factor.

There will always be a few jets restored and flown,like the Harrier and indeed the rarity should help bookings to offset costs. And I feel it is hourly costs which limit the more complex types, the current mil jets are eye wateringly expensive per hour, http://nation.time.com/2013/04/02/costly-flight-hours/
They can also be modified to look the same but have kit removed. With VR getting better seeing actual airctaft of yesteryear fly might be less in demand?

We seethe same issues in modern autos. The McLaren F1 is said to be the last analog supercar, likewise current F1 racers probably won’t be running a 100 years from now, unless the builders or future collector comes up with some clever computer work. Jim Clark’s Lotus has a better chance at operating in the future (alongside WWII aircraft) than digital autos half a century newer.

Though off-topic, I’d have to disagree because it’s already being done: Dawn Treader managed to get a recent Penske restored and running, despite the fact that it comprised little more than a tub and an engine when they started. IIRC they managed to source and re-programme a lot of ECU-related stuff despite the “antiquated” computer language being long-lost. Likewise there are also very recent F1, Champ Car and even Group C cars running quite happily in private hands.

I think we need to wind the clock back imagine what we’d have thought of the likelihood of privately-operated F-104s, F-4s, F-100s, Lightnings (the real one that is) and even a Vulcan if we’d considered the subject back in the 1960s. Even at that time the thought of hordes of reproduction Spitfires and Mustangs – Me-262s even would have seemed absurd, and even more so the thought of cottage industries manufacturing components to support the whole operation.

So no, flying history will not stop at 1960, 1970 or whenever.

By 2117 will that many people really care? There seem to be far fewer people among the younger generations interested in aeroplanes than when I was young, and I don’t see that situation improving. Go to an airshow and look around. Most of the camera wielding enthusiasts you see will be 50 plus.

I think it will mostly end with aircraft from 1960s and early 1970s but trainers and light aircraft (such as the A-37) may find new life. Between costs and de-mill laws aging modern hardware is going to be scrapped or regulated to the ground. Although there are a couple of privately-owned Su-27s and a Mig-29 which are an exception.

You can cross Sabre off that list now: the chances of seeing one in European skies pretty small and UK skies nil.

I’m sure some Tucanos have made it onto the register though?