Mosquito KA114 January Update

Ron

Jerry Yagen

Dave

nz Mossie

Anyone know where this aircraft is going when its finished – FHC – Paul Allen ?

thanks ..Ron

Thank you for these helpful and interesting replies. I wasn’t exactly sure about the weight of new or rermanufactured fittings, but thanks for the information.

SoG

I sure enjoy the monthly updates. I cant wait to see the wing start taking shape.

Hi, I am involved with the KA114 project. From the remains of the original fuselage and wing the standard of workmanship was quite high, however only some mistakes were made in the form of miss drilled holes here and there and some of the finishing work in the minor detailed areas was average to good. However it was war time and the object of the exersize was to get the finished product out fighting the war which as we all know it did well. As for the castings they were basically all sand cast which gave a rough texture and gave the appearance that they were crudely fashioned… this not the case as they were made to very exacting tollerances, the corrosion resistance is very good for their age at 60 odd years! My Airspeed Oxford did away with expensive castings and used light steel units instead but De Havilland had something to prove and used the best availible products at the time. It is as complex as any medium bomber at the time with an advanced electrical and hydraulic system, the pneumatic brakes let the aircraft down a bit but then everything has a weakness.
We are using the West system for bonding the wood, the weight difference should be about the same as for the old glue, but the advantages are a more durable bond over time and a stonger bond strength. The cables AV specs are using are modern teflon, as the originals were rubber covered and not UV resistant, they were also not fire resistant.

If a project such as this is to rely on the original type certificate for airworthiness then the materials used must be either the same or “of an equivalent mechanical properties” to those originally used. For the wood content of the airframe it should be pretty straight forward obtaining the right types & grade, particularly in NZ. From the pictures and judging by its distinctive colour, the glue seems to be Aerodux. According to my copy of AP2270 this glue was introduced sometime before 1946 , but I’m not sure when it was first used on Mosquito production. It is a waterproof phenolic based which is still approved for aviation use today (it is also used for wooden boat hulls). Again from the photographs the cables seem to be a modern PTFE or Kapton or ETFE type and represent a considerable improvement over the original rubber insulation types.

Overall the empty weight should be very close to that of the original. I’m surprised you consider “different materials or better specifications than the original” equals heavier. For better aircraft materials, strength for strength this normally equals lighter.

This rebuild is a brilliant achievement, now where’s my chisels and passport?

Very much depends on the manufacturer, and country of origin.

The woodwork on the mossie was built to an extraordinarily high degree of accuracy, considering it is made of a material which expands and contracts with temperature/humidity. The metal fittings were often a bit rougher, but still very high quality.

The Spitfire is a high quality piece of kit – the forgings, castings and machined parts were of a quality not easy to match without a large investment in tooling.

On the German side, the early to mid war aircraft are a stunning piece of engineering. The FW190 was extremely complex, and built to a much higher standard than many of the allied aircraft. However by late war, much of it had been simplified, and many of the expensive forgings/castings had been replaced by fabricated steel items.

Similarly the Me262 was a breakthrough in terms of the jet performance. The build quality of the airframe however was fairly poor.

There is no right or wrong answer here. As far as Glynns Mosquito is concerned, I am told by those that have seen it that it is a real work of art – as were the originals….

Bruce

Could anyone please comment on the standard of materials and work evident in war-time manufacture, as compared with those of today? This restoration looks to my untrained eye to be top quality in terms of materials and skills – were those of the war-time production much the less?

What is the likely hood of the restored airframe being very much over-weight as a result of different materials or better specifications than the original?

SoG

Very very very nice!!!!
I like the look of this…….lots!
My most favouritest aeroplane in the whole wide world!!!!!!!

Bomberboy