P-51D-5-NA G-MRLL

I think the thing about MH is the fact that not only does he OWN the aeroplane, he restores it HIMSELF with his in house team – and from what I read EVERYTHING including the engine!

If i wore a hat it would be suitable doffed…Owning is often a matter of money but actually having the skills to do the whole kit and caboodle in a restoration, well, fair play to the bloke, thats all I’m saying…

Being involved in restorations myself, only the restorer knows how original an aeroplane is – if he wants to keep the proportion of original material TO THAT AIRFRAME quiet (for NOS stock spares are surely original too?) I dont blame them, revealing the origins not only provides ammo for those who knock ‘originality’ but also I imagine, no I know, can cause CAA problems.

I’m not a kiss ass – never met the bloke but appreciate the graft you have to put in – we may be doing a relatively boring unsexy transport and trainer but doing it we are. The blokes better at doing it than we are. Therefore, respect.

TT

It will be as original as many other warbirds out there

Or to put a question another way..

On completition, what percentage of the airframe will be original?

I think from memory the AFC’s Hurricane is 95% new, for example.

Just like Grandad’s proverbial axe..

Didn’t really know I had to own one to participate on this forum. So no, I don’t have one. But, keeping in line with your reasoning, what about yours, had it for long?
T J

Haven’t got a Mustang but I do actually have 6 aircraft ranging from modern to warbird matey.

Didn’t really know I had to own one to participate on this forum. So no, I don’t have one. But, keeping in line with your reasoning, what about yours, had it for long?

I do not own a P51 however I am actively involved in the maintenance and operation of one owned by a friend.

I would also go for a ride in one of the new built Yak-9’s currently flying, but I wouldn’t accept a claim that those very a/c flew in WWII and had combat history.

You were the ones that keep banging on about combat history not us.

But since you obviously know so much about this, post a few photos of the remains getting ready to be put in jig, and you can crucify Martin and me in public. And since poor Martin have already asked you “pretty please, can we see photos” I assume you will end this debate for us by doing so instead of moaning!

It is not my place to post photographs here, you will have to take my word and that of other forum members who have seen the project

I do think it is lousy to claim (as in one case) to have a special a/c, bring in the family and friends of the pilot and toot the bugle that it is their relative’s old aircraft, when it was in fact a brand spanking new airplane!

I’ve no idea what you are talking about here but in recent years we have had a pilot who flew the actual aircraft my friend owns who showed us his log book to prove it. Flypast covered this as well as another important event recently.

Now please can we stop this and move on

So whats the history of your P51?

Didn’t really know I had to own one to participate on this forum. So no, I don’t have one. But, keeping in line with your reasoning, what about yours, had it for long?

I’m sure everyone with a warbird will hang avidly on your every sentiment as well.
Bet if MH offered you a ride you wouldn’t turn it down because its not a real P51 in your eyes either.
As Y11F said, what history does your P51 have?
There are those who do and those who talk.

I would also go for a ride in one of the new built Yak-9’s currently flying, but I wouldn’t accept a claim that those very a/c flew in WWII and had combat history. If you were to put on your bifocals and actually read my posts, you will see that I look forward to see the Mustang flying, nor am I saying that Maurice Hammond is up to something fishy. But since we are talking about a P-51D in the works to be rebuilt to flying status which also have combat history it is in a different league than most other survivors. Simply by being a combat veteran!
You know, history didn’t grind to a sudden halt for some of these planes when WWII ended. In fact what happens to them now every day is history in the making. Therefore it is interesting to know if the planes are what they claim to be, or not. Or doesn’t the history we make today matter? So should we let people in 50+ years think that all surviving 51s in 2005 were what they are painted as. Doesn’t matter, not important, only history… :rolleyes: 🙁

Then why run down the efforts of those who do and then take the time to display it for the enthusiasts.

Where did I run down anyones efforts? I just wanted to know if we have a bona fide warrior out there. But since you obviously know so much about this, post a few photos of the remains getting ready to be put in jig, and you can crucify Martin and me in public. And since poor Martin have already asked you “pretty please, can we see photos” I assume you will end this debate for us by doing so instead of moaning!

What is really sad are the self appointed experts who claim there are historians.

We could all claim to do that.

I’ve written to veterans,collected original photos of ww2 aircraft helped with paint schemes,etc but i will never claim to consider myself expert on anything.

Mr Hammond has produced a fantastic airworthy P-51.

The workmanship is second to none.

He’s about to complete another one.

That speaks for itself.

It’s crap throwing like this thread that soils this forum.

Bwb,now off into exile

You can rest assured that I don’t look upon myself as the oracle of Delphi when 51s are concerned. However I have seen and learned a lot when it comes to warbirds, and I do think it is lousy to claim (as in one case) to have a special a/c, bring in the family and friends of the pilot and toot the bugle that it is their relative’s old aircraft, when it was in fact a brand spanking new airplane!
I can’t find anywhere in my posts where I’m taking a shot at Mr. Hammond’s workmanship, and that he does sloppy work, nor is that the issue here if people would care to read the posts! :confused:

So to those who can’t read my posts very well:

I love to see a new P-51D take to the air!
I love to see a new P-51D take to the air!
I love to see a new P-51D take to the air!
I love to see a new P-51D take to the air!
I love to see a new P-51D take to the air!

Now, get it!!!!!!!! 😡

T J

I wholeheartidly aree with AF and BWB.

Jeeeees – its a funny night, I’m agreeing with Bentwingbomber now.

If some of the planes flying around at the moment are looked after half as well as mr Hammonds fleet, we would have a forum full of dull and listless threads, saying nothing of interest to most of us.

As for the second Mustang, I’m sure it’ll be better than mine.

I’m not an expert, I’ve only been operating these things for 20 odd years, I’m still learning and will be until they nail the lid on my box.

Now for ****s sake chill out.

AF (Ex BBMF)

What is really sad are the self appointed experts who claim there are historians.

We could all claim to do that.

I’ve written to veterans,collected original photos of ww2 aircraft helped with paint schemes,etc but i will never claim to consider myself expert on anything.

Mr Hammond has produced a fantastic airworthy P-51.

The workmanship is second to none.

He’s about to complete another one.

That speaks for itself.

It’s crap throwing like this thread that soils this forum.

Bwb,now off into exile

Did I accuse you directly? Lets just leave this alone. This whole episode has saddened me a great deal.

Then why run down the efforts of those who do and then take the time to display it for the enthusiasts.

Which part of my statement above (repeated below) don’t you understand ?

I never questioned the efforts these gentlemen do in restoring/rebuilding historic aircraft to airworthy condition – they are to be congratulated and thanked.

Martin 😡

Then why run down the efforts of those who do and then take the time to display it for the enthusiasts.

As Y11F said, what history does your P51 have?
There are those who do and those who talk.

missing the point really, not everyone is able to buy and restore a mustang are they?

aw comeon – you act like somebody pi$$ed in your teapot –

we (T J and myself) asked questions as historians do – and since we both do know a little bit about warbirds, especially P-51’s, we’ve seen many things under this sun already.

I for myself stated that I love to see another airworthy Mustang – because a Mustang it surely is.

I never questioned the efforts these gentlemen do in restoring/rebuilding historic aircraft to airworthy condition – they are to be congratulated and thanked.

I am also very well aware of the requirements from the Authorities for the registration of historic aircraft.

And I do like to learn and accept new facts as they transpire.

So can anyone step forward and actually show us those “substantial remains”, “virtually complete fuselage” or whatever is the basis for this project, to enlighten us ?

Or do we not deserve to see such evidence because we are the bad boys and asked the wrong questions ?

Cordially
Martin

But I will be asking questions regarding pedigree of a/c even in the future, and be vocal about it if things looks to be dubious. So if that makes you as sore as this post indicates, tough!
T J

I’m sure everyone with a warbird will hang avidly on your every sentiment as well.
Bet if MH offered you a ride you wouldn’t turn it down because its not a real P51 in your eyes either.
As Y11F said, what history does your P51 have?
There are those who do and those who talk.

So whats the history of your P51?

Made by Airfix in the 80’s/90’s more than likely. 😀 I personally can’t wait to see this Mustang flying around Suffolk if it looks half as good as Janie it will be superb.

So whats the history of your P51?

If its built to the same spec as a P51, it looks exactely the same and flies the same then its a Mustang.

Yeah, but it doesn’t become a WWII veteran on that account!

If the provenance of an airframe really bothers you buy it from the owner and scrap it, if not leave private owners who spend an awful lot of their own money on something that then turns up at a display at their cost for your enjoyment alone and go train spotting or something.

There are some people out there who think you shouldn’t tell stories about having something you don’t have.:( And I’m pretty sure one of the commandments Moses got hold of stated something to that effect also! As for trains, thanks but no thanks. Not interested! But I will be asking questions regarding pedigree of a/c even in the future, and be vocal about it if things looks to be dubious. So if that makes you as sore as this post indicates, tough!

By the way, I have not claimed that Maurice Hammonds P-51D isn’t what it says it is, but that is why we ask; because we’d like to know.

T J

Maybe its the spirit of the original aircraft!

Perfect ! I just love that thought ! The aircraft’s spirit lives on, like the one of the lost pilot. And together they provide high cover.

Martin

I dont think anyone will doubt the fact that it will be a beutifull example of a P51 and a beutifull example of Mr H’s fantastic work and be great to see it in the air. I think the problem is when you try to say that it is a particular A/C with combat history that was shot down in combat. It may well contain bits of said A/C but it clearly is not that A/C. I rearly dont see the point in trying to do it! It will be a fantastic aeroplane in its own right and be great to see another P51 gracing the skies, be thankfull there are people like Mr H who is prepared to spend his time and hard earned cash on such projects, as for the rest of the crap bandied about on here, who gives a f***!!!! as long as another beautifull A/C takes to the air.

Agree with the sentiment in the last line, I think the point is the CAA needs an identity, lets face it, a few of the Spitfires flying today are new aircraft with a few original bits in. Maybe its the spirit of the original aircraft!