Kurt Tank's Fw-190 Butcher bird/" Wuerger " Thread.

more please

Any more Butcher Bird’s getting about!!!! to Add here silly 😉

Glad to be of help…

That’s two good deeds this week. I’m exhausted…

If you look at both images you will notice that although they are clearly the same ‘picture’. Suprisingly the Copy actually shows more of the image than the ‘original’.
Perhaps it was copied somewhere else on the web???

I know how he got it now, he bought a Fw190 walkaround I was selling via another website. The original scan on that walkaround was larger than the pic I posted earlier.

Steve

that’s the catch mate, the Tiger Moth is not that far and unreachable as a Red Arrows Hawk (a sucky plane indeed..)! I mean a kid who’s willing to have a close look to an aeroplane will even get the chance of sitting in a Tiger, while how many chances would he have to sit in a Red Arrows Hawk? I never flew in a jet and i’m sure it must be a thrill (apart for the fact that i’d prolly paint the cockpit with a nice breakfast color..) and a one of a kind experience, but still the magic of flying with the sky as your canopy it is something that can’t be substituted by anything else and can hardly be described by who lived it.. That’s the magic of flight, being immersed in the sky, feeling it on your face.. going poetic again.. oh well! :rolleyes:

Alex

Alex – the Tiger Moth I saved came in four tea chests and a pile of parts which filled a
Luton van. At the time I rescued it I certainly couldn’t afford to rebuild it. It was passed on to a friend who has since become a great friend. Twelve years later and multiple thousands of pounds later she flew. She is certainly inspirational to me and hopefully others . She is certainly a superb Tiger Moth but I am well aware that to many she is a biplane and to others an ‘aeroplane’ .
I feel I have maybe done my bit for preservation and hopefully by introducing
others to the type she will keep the spirit of the type in the minds of others.
However the fact still remains that in an air display the vast majority of people
will find the Red Arrows stunning whereas the Tiger Moth on a similar billing would be interesting. This doesn’t deminish the impact of the type but the fact remains that
if you ask a member of the public what aircraft they know the following will probably
spring to mind : Jumbo Jet ,Red Arrow and Concorde. Enthusiasts are great who wish to see Mr Camplin’s Dora in the air -however they havn’t as of yet purchased it off him
so maybe by spending vast sums of money on her he is allowing someone the chance
to fly her in the future and preserving her now.

James – should I ask my son who has never heard of one or indeed any number of the airshow audience who go to see the Red Arrows and a Harrier ? Enthusiasts are great
for what they want to see in the air but they don’t pay the bills to make it happen.

this is pure nonsense… U can’t make such adfirmations if you dont know what u r talking about mate.. When I went around Italy with my friends in their Tiger Moths we were always invited to take part at the airshows, and the organizers paid for all of the expenses: fuel, oil, food, hotels too! U do it for fun and passion, of course it’s not safe and wise to lose your money on it, but as long as there are enthusiasts willng to help you flying your kites contributing to the costs of it u can do it great! Your attitude is more preservative, and I’m not saying it’s completely wrong, but it doesnt help attracting ppl either.. The best feeling I felt was when many shy children asked us to sit in the pits and their parents took a pic of them.. U could see the eyes of these children sparkle with fantasy and fun, and if one of those hundred kids becomes an aviation enthusiaust and does something out of it… well I did my small part in the preservation of aviation history.. 🙂

Alex

If your son has never heard of one, then you should further his education immediately! 😀

Sure, there´s no accounting for any individuals taste in anything (including aircraft), but I would really think that amongst the ranks of WW2/warbird enthusiasts, that a flying Dora would be pretty high on anyones `wish list´. It is on mine. Or would everyone like to see another Mustang?

cheers

James – should I ask my son who has never heard of one or indeed any number of the airshow audience who go to see the Red Arrows and a Harrier ? Enthusiasts are great
for what they want to see in the air but they don’t pay the bills to make it happen.

I cannot see that there is a groundswell of opinion to get a Dora flying .

Eh!?!?? Just ask anyone….. 😀

Do u think the average museum visitor does have any clue about what kinda FW190 is it either?? The A+ restoration they did it’s just something a few ppl in the world can REALLY appreciate.. even the average warbird junkie can’t tell the difference between an original rivet and a replaced one, and this obsessive research in these distinctive features is exagerated imho..

Alex

Alex – I am not killing anything in the warbird fraternity. Insurance has rocketed-fuel has rocketed and airfields are by and large either being built on or being less warbird friendly. Simply put when we have two flyable FW190D’s put one in the air and the other in a museum. Whether you want to use the engine hours up or not a flying accident can occur as soon as you leave terra firma – is it really worth the risk when
most people who go to airshows couldn’t really care what mark of FW190 it is?
The world has changed – aircraft are indeed being viewed as investments
but if it means the likes of Paul Allen can fund world class restorations of aircraft like
his FW190 well it can only be to the better.

Ok, let’s say that this Dora is probably a one of a kind exemplar, but still I think it could be flown for at least the engine’s TBO.. As per the preservation: I’ve often seen flying warbirds restored in better conditions than museum ones (often lacking a gauge, a spar or something..). I dont know if u r in the restoration rally David, but the less u change in a plane config the better.. Apart for the obscene ultra modern cockpit layouts seen in some 70s/80s restorations, it’s not difficult to give the bird the proper look he had originally.
Here’s my point: let’s say u have 50 spits, u can put one for each mark in a museum, bring it back to its original standard (and no compromises here..), the rest of the birds must keep on flying, as the real deal is about this. U gotta think about drawing average people’s interest in aviation, it doesnt have to be just a thing for appreciators.. U have a FW190 sitting in a museum with original FuG radios and MG151/20 cannons, cool, but it’s just something sitting there, u know it’s there but it’s not like u go there everyday and stick yr head inside to watch the radios or the original oxygen bottles.. As I said sometimes it sounds like feticism to me, and this is the death sentence of warbirds real meaning: testifying an era by taking them back to the air, allowing children to feel the thrill and amusement of seeing an old biplane roaring in front of them, creating in them the passion and interest in aviation. U’ll hardly find a 10 years old boy interested in the fact that “this original FW190 D9 still has all the original equipment it had during the war”..
It’s your egoistic need to preserve flyable planes that is killing the warbird entourage my friends.. Let’s think about the year 2100: u’ll have a FW190 in original conditions but that it’s fading and breaking.. things dont last forever, planes in particular.. so since it’s gonna fade and destroy someday why not flying it now that is possible? As I said it’s just a waste…

Alex

In the 1950’s we had hundreds of Spitfires being scrapped. By scrapping so many they became scarse and it encouraged people to rescue and restore them . Speculation has always been an element of preservation. If an object has no value it won’t be saved end of story. The fact that Mustangs and the like have rocketed in value
has meant that far fewer are now cut to build racers and the accident rate has dramatically reduced. In part due to better training but also due to their value.
Preservation is exactly that – keeping them in as near condition as they saw service. Putting them in the air and flying them safely requires compromises for
their safe operation. Great to see fly but these machines were designed as fighting machines. Fly now with GPS ,transponders ,baggage lockers instead of guns and jump seats and you are not preserving heritage but making it into what you think it should be.

u r right ben, but there has been too much speculation around it, I still think it’s just a matter of money, more than “preservation aims”…

Alex

Alex – Wizzard Investments disagree with you – they have a stash of Spits a Hellcat, Corsair and other assorted goodies (I stand to be corrected) at North Weald, though i think they have just moved, they sell one everyso often….they are a syndicate of investors – no tax to pay on sale –

Just the same as an antique vase…

Whether they are to be flown is the current owners prerogative – as long as they are looked after -the next owner can restore to fly and operate –

Yes, we are custodians of historical objects – that is precisely what Doug Champlain is – he has restored the Dora to A1 condition – what happens to it when it is transferred to the next owner, who knows – but during his ownership (BTW HE saved it ) it did not crash, deteriorate or degrade.

Doug Champlains footnote in history will be as someone who saved a considerable number of rare aircraft for posterity, not as someone who didnt fly a 190 – if he hadnt then there would be only one proper Dora in the world.

Fly them yes, as a priority sure, but weigh up the risk of losing them altogether and your responsibility to those who come after you.

TT

The Fw190 hangar picture is actually one of mine ( see http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/sh…?t=40232&page=1 ), or “Neilly” was standing right next to me as I took the picture. It is the example hanging in the IWM at Lambeth.

If you look at both images you will notice that although they are clearly the same ‘picture’. Suprisingly the Copy actually shows more of the image than the ‘original’.
Perhaps it was copied somewhere else on the web???

Anyway here is that aircraft now…

I fr one would like to see one fly.

Thanks, PL.

Every little bit of info helps to piece the whole picture together. What’s needed are detailed photos of the rudder frame, ribs, and the wire cord that’s used to attach the fabric to the ribs. From my research, the Fw-190 uses a different type of fabric attachment to the cord stitching normally found on fabric control surfaces such as those on the Spitfire and Bf 109.

This photo was found in Warbirds but the quality is not sufficient to yield all the information required.

I tracked down the nearby warbird owner of both Fw 190 and Bf 109 restoration projects, but he told me that the airframes are being restored in Russia and in Romania. That’s a whole lot of distance from the USA.

Thanks anyway.

Same source, this time part of a beautiful drawing . . .

Not a photo, but a scan of a cutaway from page 115 of “Aircraft Anatomy of WW2”.
Hope this helps!

NASM Fw-190A-8

Here are a couple of fairly recent photos of the NASM Fw 190A-8 which I first saw many years ago at the Silver Hill restoration facility. It’s now at NASM Hazy, parked under the wing of the Enola Gay which sits raised on stands.

In following this thread, I too was amazed when I initially read that the Dora restored to airworthy condition would never see air under its wings. What a shame. Airplanes are meant to be flown, not kept in a hangar like some of the classic cars kept in heated and airconditioned garages as a form of 3D art, never to see the open road. How frustrating it would be to own and never be able to fly a Dora! Why not build a model airplane?

By the way, if anybody has any photos of the FW-190 rudder under construction, I’d appreciate it if they’d post them. Any photos of the bare bones rudder frame and also close-ups showing the fabric stitching. Thanks.