Could museum aircraft fly??

No, it will always be feasible, whatever the aircraft. However, in 99% of cases, it wont be financially viable, which would be the sticking point.

Bruce

Gents, stop looking at individual aircraft – the facts are simple:

Could you fly any currently static museum aircraft? – no
Could you restore any museum aircraft to fly? – yes (with conditions)
In 99% of cases, would it be feasible to restore any museum aircraft to fly? – no.

If you were to choose a static aircraft from a museum to use in a “fuel up and fly it” scenario, it certainly wouldn’t want to be Cosford’s Lincoln. One look up into the bomb bay on your walk around, followed by a quick count of disconnected pipes and cables in there would be enough to change your mind.

🙁

Re. Black 6, at least there was something left of it to put in a museum unlike many other rare aircraft which are lost in crashes in this country.

FW 190

I do have somewhere photo’s of the Fiat CR42,BF110,ME410 and Stuka ground running I think one or two of the others also ran.

It is the dim and distant past but from memory it was in the earl/mid 1970’s.

This was ground run at ST Athan in the 80’s, one aircraft that springs to mind is black 6, it should never have been put in a museum it the first place.

JT, I have to disagree with your last para, surely it is possible in theory that many examples of museum aircraft could fly?
Yes it would be a massive engineering challange or a major rebuild in most cases, but that would be money and interest driven, if the aircraft needs more money than the interest can deliver then the engineering won’t follow.

Reality is something else of course, suggestions of B-52, Concorde, & SR-71 flying are far fetched, some aircraft such as the aforementioned Sunderland and some notables with wing spar cuts are pretty well non candidates.
I was having a good look around the FAAM Gannet the other day, and there doesn’t appear to be much that could stop that being restored to flight.

The argument of what should fly or remain as static not withstanding of course!

Didn’t we have a thread here recently about museum aircraft that have flown again? Strathallan springs to mind.

Are you saying that it is easier to strip down a complete aircraft, refurbish every part and then rebuild it rather than have everything made new and assembled? (assuming of course that all parts are available new – which is another minefield!).

Not sure where the Boeing 737 comes in to the question – I believe the subject was the Spitfire – and in the case of that type I say yes it is ‘easier’ to strip down and re-build etc. In the case of another aircraft (where every part was available brand new off the shelf – having been made by others) it would be easier to build new.

But a concise sensible answer is:
With money, and persuasion toward the CAA, most things could fly. But as stated by the former engineers, it would take so much effort. Alot of museum pieces are bereft of their internal fittings and all consumables would HAVE to be replaced, it’s just not a viable option for all but a lucky few. Incidentally, ground running an aircraft is relatively simple, (I ran Lightning XR724 at Binbrook), but would I let anyone even think of flying in an aeroplane without a FULL tear down? No way.

Easy answer….

Yes, the RAF still fly some museum pieces:
VC-10
TriStar
Puma
Sea King
1st Gen Typhoon….

Or black 9 depending on the pilot.

Thats cruel! :dev2:

Depends what you mean by restoration. We’ve all seen ‘number plate’ restorations which are as original as Trigger’s broom. If you are talking about something that is original that has sat in a museum for years then I think more effort is required if you want to use the original bits. Let me add that I’m all for seeing stuff in the air.

As someone has said, if you throw enough money at something then it will happen. It depends how much money you want to throw at it.

I completely disagree with that suggestion!

Are you saying that it is easier to strip down a complete aircraft, refurbish every part and then rebuild it rather than have everything made new and assembled? (assuming of course that all parts are available new – which is another minefield!). I must inform Boeing that it will be easier to simply re-build their old 737 fleet rather than to build a new one…. or was it that I mistakenly mentioned the word ‘Spitfire’?

Either way, the answer to the thread is, ‘no’. When it comes to flying currently static museum aircraft, there will be a huge amount of engineering work required regardless of whether the aircraft has an expired permit, or has been in a museum environment since 1920. The degree of work required will vary dependant on the work performed on the aircraft since it’s enclosure in the museum, the conditions in which it has been stored, the length of time it has been stored, whether it was previously registered as a civilian aircraft, it’s retirement servicability state…..

Going on the recent restoration to flight status of 2 Mark 1 Spitfires, i`m sure getting K9942 airworthy would not be much of a challenge after the recent attention she received?

I think when you look back to films made in 60s thru to the 80s im sure many could be flyable with tinkering. but the old days like Southend HAM where a battery and fuel along with the likes of pilots no longer with us you could of seen Lincoln. Beverley and half a dozen others head into the blue.
As said earlier CAA will if they get a chance have you taken off to the padded room gor even asking.
Mind you I have often thought the same. now where is my straight jacket ?

There’s slightly more to it than that Trolley. Just because it looks like an aircraft doesn’t mean that it is an aircraft in the literal sense. Most of them look like aircraft but have as much chance of flying as I have of laying an egg.

If money was no object i would love to see the Luftwaffe aircraft in Hendon fired up,BF110,He111,Ju87 etc,and the RAF Defiant.

I seem to recall a certain station commander got his rear well and truly set on fire because all the charge sin his care his team had virtually got to flight status.I do have somewhere photo’s of the Fiat CR42,BF110,ME410 and Stuka ground running I think one or two of the others also ran before he got told in certain terms was he to continue with this level of restoration.

It is the dim and distant past but from memory it was in the earl/mid 1970’s.

Mike E

www.aircraftrestorationgroup.webs.com

I’ve often wondered this. There are some static aircraft that I would give anything to see flying.
I’m also of the mind that at least one Concord should have been kept in flying condition as a national monument in much the same way as the BBMF.

If not a Concord back in the air from Duxford, how about their SR71?.
Ron

Absolutely; John, you have never built/restored a Spitfire!

It is easier to build a new spitfire using plans / drawings and a data plate than it would be to restore one….

I completely disagree with that suggestion!

I’ve often wondered this. There are some static aircraft that I would give anything to see flying.
I’m also of the mind that at least one Concord should have been kept in flying condition as a national monument in much the same way as the BBMF.

I think when you look back to films made in 60s thru to the 80s im sure many could be flyable with tinkering. but the old days like Southend HAM where a battery and fuel along with the likes of pilots no longer with us you could of seen Lincoln. Beverley and half a dozen others head into the blue.
As said earlier CAA will if they get a chance have you taken off to the padded room gor even asking.
Mind you I have often thought the same. now where is my straight jacket ?