I have been reading the recent posts of the fate of the Comet in Scotland, and the Supermarine Swift. Working at the Mosquito Museum in St Albans has given me a taste for what happens when airframes are left outside – I also spent ten years with Historic Flying, working on all of the Spitfires that have come out of there to date. I left there 2 years ago.
I think we should all appreciate what happens to airframes that are left outside for extended periods of time, and why they get into dangerous states.
As David Burked mentioned in a previous post, the actual acquiring of airframes such as these was relatively easy, and few people worried much about what would happen to them in the long term.
Many 50’s and 60’s era aircraft have high strength aluminium forgings, which make up all of the attachment brackets, beams, spars and so on. During service these can be regularly inspected, and are changed at the drop of a hat if shown to be unserviceable. As soon as the inspection regime stops, these parts go into a decline. On the Comet, there will be little visible damage; the problems occur when you move a flap, an elevator or other surface, and start to look at what is happening behind the scenes.
As an example, the DH125 at the Mosquito Museum was suffering from extreme corrosion in places when we brought her undercover, and it was really touch and go as to whether it could be saved. Frankly, if the museum had had to pay staff to do the work, the cost could not have been borne, and it would have been scrapped. Although we have rectified a good deal of the damage, there is corrosion in the aeroplane we simply cannot stop, such is the degree to which the damage has been done. We have cleaned it as best as we can and made it safe for the short term, but know full well that more serious measures must be taken to preserve it in the long term.
The Comet has been outside, in the sea air, for nearly 20 years, and is going to be suffering. We should not make the mistake of berating its current custodians for the lack of foresight shown by their predecessors. All of the collections in the country have aircraft that WILL inevitably succumb to the weather. The Comet has sadly been at the forefront of those aircraft that will be scrapped over coming years. We are fortunate that there are examples at Duxford and Wroughton that have been cared for and have been preserved for the future. The Duxford aeroplane is also incidentally in something of a state, having been outside for much of the last 20 years, but it has been recognised as such a significant aeroplane that something can be done to save it. It has also been regularly maintained, which does help!
Over the coming years we will be looking at Vulcans around the country being scrapped, and others. The Swift mentioned in another thread needs a very great deal of work in order to save it – in the order of magnitude of the work done by Historic Flying and others on Spitfires. Though I would prefer to see it saved, I cant see anyone being able to spend cash of that order of magnitude on an airframe that is comparatively worthless.
Incidentally, as alluded to in the latest Flypast, I for one hope that our museums don’t end up with Concordes all over the place – we will be in this same situation in 20 yrs time, when corrosion has taken its inevitable toll.
Rant over – would be interested in reaction!
Bruce
By: Peter - 30th April 2003 at 16:23
wd40???
Not the best stuff to use on aircraft… However if you do not have penetrating oil over there then I guess it is the only thing that will release ancient bolts..
Lets hope something gets done about this swift while there is something left to save…!
By: ukmams - 30th April 2003 at 10:47
Sorry that should have been WD40 and not WD30. Told you I wasn’t a techie!!
😀
By: ukmams - 30th April 2003 at 10:45
Thanks for all the replies.
Fingers crossed that we can do something about her.
Although I was a non ‘technical’ trade in the RAF, I’m handy with a can of WD30 and a spanner. I’m quite willing to give up time to help.
Lets keep the thread ‘live’ and who knows what people power can achieve.
Scotty
Ps. Anyone know of cheap flatbed hire??? 😉
By: David Burke - 29th April 2003 at 20:14
Damien – It really depends on who put it back together when it got to Upper Hill. Some people use grease etc and put things together nicely -others just bang the bolts in and forget about it.
I have done plenty of jobs where the description has been that it will take you weeks to get a gearbox off and it has infact taken hours. It really depends on how motivated and skilled you are at the job.
By: Ant.H - 29th April 2003 at 20:01
“How about some of us ‘locals’ (well Worcester is close to Leominster) get together and try to persuade the owner to part company with her? Maybe talking to and getting his son on side might help….?!!”
I can’t say too much at the moment,exept to say that there are wheels in motion already.I have high hopes of the aircraft being moved before the end of the year,so everyone’s offers of assistance might well be taken up on.Fingers crossed…
Bruce,would the DH Museum be seriously able to take on and restore her??
By: David Burke - 29th April 2003 at 18:56
Scotty – Moving the Swift would be relatively simple. You need
a 40 foot flatbed and say a 26 foot bed wagon with Hi-AB.
Go down two weeks before hand and hit everything that needs to be undone with WD40 and remove any access panels to gain entry to wing bolts. I imagine that not much of the electrical system or indeed fuel side is connected up anyway.
It’s then a ‘simple task of trestling fuselage and wings and removing the required bolts.
Lastly its a job for ‘amateur’ professionals only – I have seen so much damage caused to airframes by people with big hammers and not much of an idea!
By: Peter - 29th April 2003 at 18:45
Save the swift??
Surely this aircraft deserves a better fate than this?? We could all do to lose some other more common types and save such rare jewels like this. I would hate to think how much in both time and money it would take to turn this corroding mass into something displayable, but it can be done…….
By: Yak 11 Fan - 29th April 2003 at 14:35
Sounds as though it’s a good idea. The alternative could be for a group to perhaps volunteer to preserve it for its current owner on site. I know this would then help its current owner realise a higher value for the aircraft, but then hopefully would mean it ultimately ends up in the hands of a preservation group rather than the local scrappy.
Certainly can’t hurt to ask the questions anyway.
By: ukmams - 29th April 2003 at 14:03
Hi everyone.
Its a while since I’ve posted to the forum but I’ve been reading the updates about the Swift at Shepards Surplus with interest.
I know the owner doesn’t want to sell it and wants a harrier in exchange but I feel it’s getting to the stage where this old girl is going to end up in bits in a scrappy before anything can be done about it.
How about some of us ‘locals’ (well Worcester is close to Leominster) get together and try to persuade the owner to part company with her? Maybe talking to and getting his son on side might help….?!!
I understand the logistics in moving/relocating an aircraft might be daunting but where there’s a will…! Many hands make light work. etc. etc.
Maybe getting an ATC squadron involved…….
Comments/Suggestions/Ideas????
Anyway action needs to be taken sooner rather than later.
Cheers
Scotty
By: Bruce - 29th April 2003 at 11:02
The recent pictures of the Swift are actually quite encouraging. The undercarriage bays, being unprotected from the weather are often the places that suffer the worst.
These pictures show a good deal of corrosion, but if you look past the pipework and fittings, the actual structure of the aircraft doesnt look too bad.
I would be interested in seeing pictures of the engine, engine bay and cockpit, so I could more accurately form a view. The other plus point is that the airframe looks to be very complete, which is another bonus as it will be nigh on impossible to find parts for a Swift.
From what I have seen, I think it should be saveable in one piece, so long as a new custodian was prepared to spend a lot of time and energy on preserving it. At the very least it would require a major strip down to guarantee a long term future. Personally, I would love to tackle something like this. I wonder if I could bring it under the museums collecting policy, as it was last operated by de Havilland!!
David – can we swap it for a Danish Hunter??
Bruce
By: David Burke - 28th April 2003 at 23:53
Ant -I was being general in what we could do without. The Swift serves to be saved but do we really require a large number of ex Danish Hunters to be preserved in the U.K ? Surely we could send a couple back to Denmark for preservation there!
By: andrewman - 28th April 2003 at 23:34
Sea Hawks
I understand and agree with what you say David,poorer examples of some types (eg SeaHawk,Hunter,Gannet etc)
Well Ant the state of some Sea Hawks is discusting for example
FGA.4 WV903 – The only FGA.4 left an just look at it the Faa should be ashamed of themselves this should be saved asap.
FGA.6 WV798 -It just gets worse this Sea Hawk is close to being a write off:mad:
FGA.6 XE339 -Another one in a very bad way still I think some parts have been used to rebuild WV908 to flying condition.
A bit ot topic but what is WV795 being used for at Bruntingthorpe is it going to be rebuilt to taxing condition or kept on static display.Still its a shame the plan to fly this went under as the only other flying example IN240 is on a pole in india now.
By: Ant.H - 28th April 2003 at 23:13
I understand and agree with what you say David,poorer examples of some types (eg SeaHawk,Hunter,Gannet etc) could be cannibalised to make a few excellent examples,but are you saying this should apply to ‘275? Personally I would have to disagree as I think she is unique in herself,and is therefore worthy of saving as she is.There is also the question of what other project 275 could donate to,considering her peculiar Mk.4 and a half status.
By the way BC,there are currently only 3 complete Swifts rather than the five you mention.There is a fourth,an F.7,under restoration,allegedly to airworthy condition,but this is looking ever less likely and the project is currently up for sale.This is one seriously rare aeroplane!
By: David Burke - 28th April 2003 at 22:29
Swifty Deteriorating
The Swift is bad but not unreparable by any standard. essentially the nuts ,bolts, rivets etc can be replaced . The skinning isn’t a major issue either. What you have to bear in mind is to tackle her
in component form so you can fully address the corrosion.
As a machine she is significant in that she represents nearly the end of the line in Supermarine built fighters .
Regarding the major issue of corrosion – now is really the time for curators to look long and hard at what they are ‘preserving’.
Simply put could some aircraft be dismantled and spares recovered for the greater good of others. This is a ‘numbers game’ – add up how many of a type are outside and then cross them off the list of survivors – if you don’t have one example undercover well your in trouble!
The needs to be a clear consensus between BAPC members
that the current position is untenable – the numbers of people visiting museums in general is down, revenues lower so lets please target the aircraft that deserve saving.
By: British Canuck - 28th April 2003 at 21:07
Sure makes that East Fortune Comet look mint in comparsion!
But seriously with only 5 complete Swift airframes left. It would be sad to lose this one..given that it does exist,
By: Ant.H - 28th April 2003 at 21:01
…left aileron.One thing that strikes me about this series of pics is how complete she is in terms of her internal bit’s n’ pieces,and also how badly corroded some parts are whilst others are seemingly untouched,such as the roof of the nosebay.
By: Ant.H - 28th April 2003 at 20:57
..nosewheel bay again…
By: Ant.H - 28th April 2003 at 20:51
…and here’s the nosewheel bay…
By: Ant.H - 28th April 2003 at 20:49
I realise that alot of what has been said about the Swift is true.She’d need one hell of a restoration effort to bring her back to her former glory,but to me,it would be worth it.I wouldn’t mind if I was 70 before she was finished,so long as she was saved for posterity.As for the idea about donating bits to the NEAM example,this is a possibility,however WK275 has numerous bits which really belong on the FR.5,including the wings,so there might not be as much comonality between the two as would appear at first.To my mind,’275 should be preserved as she is,rather than being thrown to the four winds as a spares source,although this would be better than scrapping her.
I’ve seen some more detailed pictures of her internal components,and she’s in really poor shape in many respects.What occupies the engine bay would now barely pass as an engine,and just about every nut,bolt and rivet is corroded beyond redemption.It doesn’t take an expert to realise that she’s the restoration equivelant of Mount Everest,but then that’s been climbed,so who knows.I prefer to think positively on this one for the time being,although time will tell whether she’s actually saveable.
Here’s a few pics of her emailed to me by Plazz a few days ago…
By: British Canuck - 28th April 2003 at 15:31
I guess in my ideal world..all the preserved airframes would be undercover but I do realize that this is not realistic. Smaller collections would never be able to provide this sort of overhead or expense.
I would like to make one point regarding museum presentation. It would be very nice to see more facilities build with aircraft in mind. What I mean is that the use of hangars really adds to the experience. I do find it hard to visit a museum that has packed everything it can into their building so that you can barely make out the plane for the displays!! I think it is great for photographers when they display some of their moveable aicraft outside on special sunny days(even run them up too!)..
A few museum do that over here in Canada. The CHWM(Hamilton) and CAM(Ottawa) provide display days. A dark museum is makes it difficult to see and photograph the plane true colours.
Sign In
April 28, 2003 at 12:38 pm