Sea Hawk Movements

WV838 – I have been in the position of splitting a cockpit from a fuselage and with hindsight it was the right thing to do as there wasn’t any realistic chance of saving the whole airframe. As for the Sea Hawk swop about – it’s the strangest idea I have heard for ages and effectively dilutes ‘339’ but I guess it will work out eventually !

Except 339….. wasn’t there a thread last year where someone suggested that people in the “cockpit movement” were cutting cockpits off perfectly good airframes for their own benefit, i.e not to preserve something that was being scrapped, but because they wanted a cockpit.

Logically the person who wanted the cockpit, and the person who wanted a complete A/C, should both be able to have what they want without separating an entire airframe, when one has already been cut.

339 is hardly a “perfectly good airframe”! but yes, in an ideal world, I’d have parted with 838’s cockpit and taken 339 as a single lump, but having spent countless hours on her I’m loathe to part with her – especially as she is now probably one of the most complete sea hawk cockpits in the UK. The best solution was as described. This actually saved a lot on transport costs which we, as individuals, struggle to cope with.

With high costs, limited finances and the usual storage difficulties, we made the difficult decisions we did to do the best we could to save these aircraft.

I do apologise to the W&R team though! 😉

Roy.

WV … did I miss something cos I thought you’d sold your cockpit ?????

TT

What is the plan for WV911 is it just going to stay parked up at Yeovilton ?

(this’ll confuse W&R contributors for a while 😀 )

And me (“Fleet Air Arm Fixed-Wing Aircraft since 1946”)! Mind you, it’s just the same as the Chiltern Cantello and Gatwick/Bournemouth Sea Hawks which did swaps of tails and outer wings many years ago. Nightmare to track!

WV911 was the potential flyer out of the three former AES Lee-on-Solent Sea Hawks, and it was this aircraft that couldn’t be made airworthy again due to lack of paperwork. It was a great shame as, in many ways, she was originally in better condition than WV908. Unfortunately, having sat outside for several years now there is no realistic hope of her being considered again in the future – money or no money.

Thats great news. Potentially 2 more complete Sea Hawks.

Robert,

How did you arrive at that conclusion ?

There was WV903 and XE339, plus the nose of WV838, equals 2.5 Seahawks.

Now there is WV903, and the WV838/XE339 combo, plus the nose of XE339, which still equals 2.5 Seahawks :confused:

Except 339….. …..Logically the person who wanted the cockpit, and the person who wanted a complete A/C, should both be able to have what they want without separating an entire airframe, when one has already been cut.

Stuart,

I tend to agree. Could the potential Seahawk cockpit owner not have purchased WV838 ? Instead you now have a situation where a composite airframe will be created, from an airframe that was intact, but now is reduced to a nose only. (this’ll confuse W&R contributors for a while 😀 )

.

They are rebuilt from the ground up and so the ‘right’ paperwork is generated during the build process and lifed items are known and identified. If a complete aeroplane has no paperwork there is no record of what, if any, work has been done and if this has been to the required standard. The Sea Hawk probably could fly again but only after a rebuild on the scale of the ‘dug out of the bog’ aeroplanes in order the paperwork can match the build.

Of course it can be done but it is a matter of money and there is not enough value in a Sea Hawk to make it practicable.

Thanks Melvyn – excellent explanation.

Yes, I believe XE339’s emblem is intact.

Why split 339? The cockpit was wanted by someone, the fuse was wanted by me. If I hadn’t already restored 838’s cockpit I’d have been able to keep 339 intact.

This is a best-fit solution – everyone walked away happy.

Roy.

Except 339….. wasn’t there a thread last year where someone suggested that people in the “cockpit movement” were cutting cockpits off perfectly good airframes for their own benefit, i.e not to preserve something that was being scrapped, but because they wanted a cockpit.

Logically the person who wanted the cockpit, and the person who wanted a complete A/C, should both be able to have what they want without separating an entire airframe, when one has already been cut.

Quick Sea Hawk related question…

Now I could never understand this, as surely all these warbirds that are ‘dug out of a bog’ and made airworthly again cannot have the ‘right paperwork’ but it doesn’t seem to stop them flying again! Clearly I’m missing the point here but could someone explain to me what exactly is required paperwork wise to bring an a/c back to life?

Thanks!

They are rebuilt from the ground up and so the ‘right’ paperwork is generated during the build process and lifed items are known and identified. If a complete aeroplane has no paperwork there is no record of what, if any, work has been done and if this has been to the required standard. The Sea Hawk probably could fly again but only after a rebuild on the scale of the ‘dug out of the bog’ aeroplanes in order the paperwork can match the build.

Of course it can be done but it is a matter of money and there is not enough value in a Sea Hawk to make it practicable.

Thats great news. Potentially 2 more complete Sea Hawks. No doubt you will be getting a bigger garage to keep your one in!!!

Quick Sea Hawk related question…

There used to be a Sea Hawk at VL that was in pretty good shape (WV903 maybe?) and the question was often asked could she be made airworthly?
The response was always she could never be made airworthly as she didn’t have all the correct paperwork.

Now I could never understand this, as surely all these warbirds that are ‘dug out of a bog’ and made airworthly again cannot have the ‘right paperwork’ but it doesn’t seem to stop them flying again! Clearly I’m missing the point here but could someone explain to me what exactly is required paperwork wise to bring an a/c back to life?

Thanks!

Yes, I believe XE339’s emblem is intact.

Why split 339? The cockpit was wanted by someone, the fuse was wanted by me. If I hadn’t already restored 838’s cockpit I’d have been able to keep 339 intact.

This is a best-fit solution – everyone walked away happy.

Roy.

But why split XE339 ?

.

Thanks for the news Roy.
Did XE339 still have an intact wasp/bee emblem on its hooter?

The best of luck with the restoration, and to the owner of WV903 as well.

Well Done to Roy, and all involved in saving the airframes from VL.

Tim