REPLICA Spitfire comes off road trailer in Surrey accident

Hi everybody,I cant thank everyone enough for the kind words and support.Terry has vowed we will get her back to her former glory .The wings and tail were brought back yesterday the wings are in a pretty bad state.qldspitty Il drop you a message that would be fantastic anything tail section would be great

A real tragedy, I also hope that it is quickly restored to its previous perfection.

Looking back through the posts here, it reminds me that Jeffrey Quill was also, initially, in a quandary concerning what to describe the Spitfire Society’s new build ‘representation’ of their full size prototype Spitfire K5054 back in the late 1980’s when fund raising was getting under way.

JQ, I was told, always insisted that good English Grammar should always be used with precision and clarity. He determined that ‘facsimile’ was appropriate and that the society should always refer to it thus. If only I might follow his good examples!

Not sure what tail stuff I have but can have a look to see what I could share over to you Stephen.

Terry,

My deepest condolence for your loss. There are no words.

Bulldog Builder

You have my full support and I will contribute to the crowdfunding when it is set up! Thanks for posting, Stephen.

Thank you all so much .I will keep you all updated with our plans .I am hoping to get a crowd funding set up as even though we do have a few spares alot of the aircraft is going to have to be rebuilt which will be 100s of man hours as many of you may know.Your support is very much appreciated we will keep you informed on our plans

Hi everybody its Terrys son Stephen.We very much appreciate everyones kinds words and support at this time.My father is devastated at what happend yesterday to the aircraft .Whether or not if its a real spitfire Il let you argue that out between yourselves we have lost a life longs work and more importantly his livelihood.We will be releasing details of what we plan to do in the future once we have properly assessed the damage.We are just glad nobody was injured in the incident and hope she will be back so we can keep showing her around the country for the public to see.

Stephen,

Thanks for the update. If there is a crowd-funding scheme (or whatever), I think a few here would be happy to support. Best wishes and hoping for a speedy recovery.

Its my understanding that Terry had started work on a second Spitfire which I believe is to be a MKI/II so he may have access to ‘spares’
I’d like to think it was insured but you know what Insurance companies are like in wriggling out of their responsibilities

Is there a way we could help fund the team to rebuild this work of art.
Ian

I wasn’t “laid down” as a transportable display airframe, ….

My point was, it was never meant to fly…nor apparently was it made from aviation grade materials.

Hi everybody its Terrys son Stephen.We very much appreciate everyones kinds words and support at this time.My father is devastated at what happend yesterday to the aircraft .Whether or not if its a real spitfire Il let you argue that out between yourselves we have lost a life longs work and more importantly his livelihood.We will be releasing details of what we plan to do in the future once we have properly assessed the damage.We are just glad nobody was injured in the incident and hope she will be back so we can keep showing her around the country for the public to see.

…undercarriage and wheels (all round)…

Well, real, reproduction, replica or FSM, that is the tipping point for me!

Although, to be honest, it must be said that since it doesn’t have an original identity of its own (unlike those ‘reproductions’ and ‘replicas’ with genuine makers plates) it can never be regarded as a ‘real’ Spitfire. Its current identity duplicates a genuine survivor, albeit in Italy, and a large proportion of the identifiable genuine material that has gone into it would duplicate a very well known flyer; if it is a near reproduction what identity does it wear on the makers plate?

Only reason an engine isn’t fitted is it would make the whole thing too heavy for the trailer I do believe…

Well at the end of the day, whatever you call it, it’s a great pity, as no doubt, it will be the owners pride and joy and I can only imagine how I’d feel if it were mine. Here’s hoping the repair work goes ok.

Daily Mail also features another slightl historic aviation story if you search Chop Gate

I wasn’t “laid down” as a transportable display airframe, it was originally built to be as exact a recreation of that made by Supermarine; don’t get too hung up about how the wings fix on, or their composition or whether there is an engine or not, (it was always intended for it to have an engine), indeed the owner has an engine, and that could be retro fitted.

Think more along the lines that over a 28 year build priorities change, I believe that at one point it was going on display in a museum, and the builder had the original wing booms to complete the wings correctly but time passes and things change.

If you subscribe to the view that it is a replica unless it was made by Supermarine, then you must take the same view of all those flying A/C that have either been extensively rebuilt or else come back from the dead.

The sensitivity issue is down to the mockups, lash ups, and FSM’s which are all referred to as replicas, even though technically they aren’t replicas at all, at best the better ones are facimiles, a true replica would be exact in every detail; blame the press they can’t tell a jet from a glider!

If you hadn’t seen the A/C disassembled and know that “the real aeroplane” is still extant in Italy, how would you know it wasn’t real ; on a recent film set the lead actor (yes I know not a bona fide expert) was asked to pick the “replica” out from the “real ones” to the great annoyance of the owner he picked a flyer as the replica!

“A toy aeroplane is something you wind up and it rolls along the floor; a model aeroplane is completely different”.

This aircraft was “laid down” as a transportable display airframe, not meant for flight. The builder was not Supermarine or any of the licensed builders. It was not made during the accepted period of Spitfire production.
The real/wartime MK805 still exists…

So sorry, by any objective definition, it is a replica/reproduction/look alike/full scale model (choose any or all).
That does not mean it’s bad or unworthy of praise and attention. I give it full marks for workmanship, effort and attention to detail.

And, I dare say it does more for the public’s perception and education about the type than a flying aircraft that is locked away or rarely seen by the public.

I don’t know why everyone is so sensitive about calling it what it is.

There is so much original ‘stuff’ in this reproduction it actually smells like a Spitfire.

We can debate until the cows come home but it won’t help Terry and the rest of the team repair the damage to MK805 or fill the looming gap in their ‘display’ income.

The time taken to build and maintain MK805 is the ‘key’ element – it is ‘stripped’ back at the end of each season to check for wear and tear from being towed around the UK for 8 or 9 months. Now they have to add the time to repair the damage while trying to complete the MkII build…

If I lived nearer to him I would offer my time to try and speed up the repairs – even if it was just making sure he had a regular supply of hot tea!

http://www.964eagle.co.uk/news/local-news/2029451/trailer-carrying-spitfire-crashes-on-a3/

More photos from a ‘radio’ programme.

I would love a glass one in my garden