Flying Mosquito B.IV DZ542 for UK

I would suggest it was swallowed up with PR34 RG300, the remains of which were at Harlingen for many years, including nacelles, undercarriage and engines, and which moved to Jim Dearborn.

Would love to the remains of that one incorporated into a new-build…….especially as it was a PR.34, RG314 that made the last operational sortie of a Mosquito in RAF service in Dec 1955.

Jim Dearborn makes sense. I had an email address for him and was in communication about eight years ago but sadly lost it all after changing email providers. Here’s the photo I mentioned: you can see the Mosquito nacelles under the Catalina wing at right:
Untitled by Zac Yates, on Flickr

I would suggest it was swallowed up with PR34 RG300, the remains of which were at Harlingen for many years, including nacelles, undercarriage and engines, and which moved to Jim Dearborn.

I don’t think anyone ever attached an identity to the second 618 squadron airframe/collection of parts. Glynn Powells T43 was a known aircraft in New Zealand, albeit it had lost its wood too!

I’m also very confused about why people are suggesting reinventing the wheel when MPT has said they’re working with AvSpecs.

The only FB.VI I have questions about is PF670/N9868F, parts of which were with the Confederate Air Force in the USA (the nacelles can be glimpsed in the square, late-1980s softcover book about the group) but vanished around 1988. The CAF has no idea where they went. Perhaps?…

Way back in about 1988, there was an advert in Hangar Stores of Aeroplane, offering ‘Two complete Mosquito aircraft, less any wood to speak of’. Much hilarity ensued at the DH Museum over this, and we assumed that the trail had gone cold. However, it hadn’t – and it transpired that both collections of parts originated with the 618 squadron aircraft that ended up in Australia at the end of the war. DZ542 was one – I don’t know if we know the identity of the other.

Wasn’t the other the T.43 NZ2308, as IIRC, both have been noted as being in Glyn’s ownership since the late 1980’s…???

My understanding of the Biggin aircraft is that it would likely have been a FBVI

I wonder the identity of that one was then….?
I can’t recall any other FB.VI ‘project identity’ being extant other than KA114 and PZ474, and the obvious 2 x projects held by the RNZAFM, the one of FAS at Christchurch and the complete example owned by John Smith…??

About the only thing we do know about the Pathfinder Trust is that they will have the aircraft built in New Zealand, so no worries in that regard.

To answer some other questions.

Way back in about 1988, there was an advert in Hangar Stores of Aeroplane, offering ‘Two complete Mosquito aircraft, less any wood to speak of’. Much hilarity ensued at the DH Museum over this, and we assumed that the trail had gone cold. However, it hadn’t – and it transpired that both collections of parts originated with the 618 squadron aircraft that ended up in Australia at the end of the war. DZ542 was one – I don’t know if we know the identity of the other.

My understanding of the Biggin aircraft is that it would likely have been a FBVI, but one assumes that the principal behind the proposal developed cold feet. It happens.

I hope we can get a bit more meat on the bones regarding the proposal for DZ542. Time will tell.

No-one is suggesting that any wheels (or moulds) be re-invented, I don’t know why a couple of people have started talking about it?

Indeed.

I wonder what put an end to the Mosquito project that was announced by the Biggin Hill team a couple of years ago, and which at that time seemed to point to the starter project of that being DZ452, and if any of the person involved in that, were/are connected with that project plan, which seemed to come to a dead end?

750k is an awful lot to find in such a short time scale for this……so I’m still in the ‘fingers crossed and hoping’ camp.

All flying Mosquito projects should be done in NZ. Its a no-brainer. There is an established Mosquito industry there with very experienced companies and individuals involved.

I know very well the amount of experience and learning that has happened there in the past 20 years. As QldSpitty says, why re-invent the wheel.

No-one is suggesting that any wheels (or moulds) be re-invented, I don’t know why a couple of people have started talking about it?

Does anyone know what is left of DZ452 and what became of it originally?

DD

All flying Mosquito projects should be done in NZ. Its a no-brainer. There is an established Mosquito industry there with very experienced companies and individuals involved.

I know very well the amount of experience and learning that has happened there in the past 20 years. As QldSpitty says, why re-invent the wheel.

And what’s the opinion of the CAA about a new built flying Mosquito in the UK?

TPM have been saying for some time that the CAA (UK, not the NZ one) have signed off on their plan.
http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/the-plan/

Presumably MPT have a similar plan.

Have they still got the moulds in NZ after the new builds? Why recreate the wheel?

And what’s the opinion of the CAA about a new built flying Mosquito in the UK?

Not a jab, I would say, for confrontation or even competition will help neither party.

The concern is a valid one, as the ‘fund’ of public goodwill/contributions is finite, and might result in 2 underfunded and stalled projects instead of one complete one.

My instinct is that when a Mosquito flies in the UK ( and it surely will, as a warbird superstar ) it will be a privately owned example. In the classic car world £6 million is not a startling sum, perhaps a McLaren F1, and for such a figure you would turn every head on the airshow scene, and if you relish attention, a flying Mosquito will certainly deliver.

For those upset about people being paid, this from an MPT (confusing how similar the acronyms are) Facebook post 13hr ago:

In regards to your enquiry about remuneration, we can confirm that The Board of Trustees, The Principal Officer and all other members of The Mosquito Pathfinder Trust are volunteers. No one is taking a salary from the charity, as for us, this is a labour of love more than anything else. We really want to see a Mosquito flying in the UK again soon and we are happy to give our own time and resource to making that happen.

And, from the red corner, the first jab: http://www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk/2017/09/13/competition-benefits-no-one-zero-sum-game/

Bruce – I’ve been working on a round-up of potential flyers and DZ452’s the only B.IV I’ve been able to come up with. It would be cool to see one fly so I was very pleased to finally learn the plans for it.

Despite certain charities having abused the confidence (trust?) that the general public have placed in them.

This is an interesting debate. In contrast with the restoration of Avro Lancaster NX611; the Lincs Aviation Heritage Centre is not a charity but every donated penny is spent on NX611 as the operating of the Centre covers the other costs allowing 100% of donations to be attributed to the restoration. Yet we as general public feel much more confident in donating to a charity.

“…do not draw any salary from the funds they are raising.”

Exactly as it should be. In other words, a ‘labour of love’.

In theory they can be ‘restored’ as any mark as the airframe is a new build anyway!