Sabrejet your examples are bordering on complete hyperbole. The Magna Carta and a McDonalds menu look in no way similar, whereas a replica would at least give a good visual representation. A Hurricane looks none like a 109 in the slightest. A Buchon is actually a 109 airframe just with a Merlin up front, so at least in that way it looks accurate!
Magna Carta vs McDonald’s menu: both bits of paper with writing on. OK I guess the surviving MC’s are vellum etc, but you seem to reinforce my point rather than the opposite.
If it’s wind-driven, doesn’t that restrict its use if it’s not windy? Driven by airflow surely? 🙂
On the basis that ‘something that looks roughly like a Bf.109 is OK’ then how about painting a few Hurricanes up to look like Buchons?
Seems strange that a forum (I’d imagine) dealing with history and historical events should condone something which purports to be something it’s not. Or are we now OK going to see the Magna Carta, even if it’s a McDonald’s menu?
None of which denigrates the excellent job being made of putting these aircraft back into the air, though I’m sure someone will be along in quick time to conveniently miss that point.
Will we ever see a Buchon painted as a Buchon? Seems a shame to see all these fake Bf’s.
Nice fridge – shame about the beer!
Construction/Constructor’s Number and Serial Number are NOT the same thing: c/n (whichever version you choose) refers to a manufacturer’s sequence number, assigned by them.
Serial number is usually the term used to indicate an in-service identifier for military aircraft in the same way as ‘registration letters/marks/numbers’ indicate civilian versions of same.
Serial number is also the term used to describe components of an aircraft which usually have a finite service life assigned to them.
Back on-topic I recall as a spotty pre-teen being told about ‘con numbers’ by an elder member of LAAS (remember them?), but at the time having no idea what it referred to. Nowadays in the industry we seem to use the term ‘MSN’ rather than c/n.
Not sure which was which, but one of those Meteor centre sections (WL360 I think) has sad connections and I recall the other was used for some kind of destructive fatigue test, which would preclude its use as a flyer and raise doubts as to its ability to support the outer wings of a static.
Oh and +1 for B-25 (see J Boyle’s comment above): we know better surely?
Or are we now OK with ‘spitfire5’ as a ‘designation’? Could be worse: on another forum I regularly see B-1Bs described under the term ‘b1b’. It’s the Text Generation I guess. One day soon we’ll all communicate in grunts and three-letter words with no vowels. Text speak. Or ‘txt spk’ for thse in th no.
Lovely to see, but a shame they keep saying that WA591 is, “…the oldest active jet aircraft in the world” – IT’S NOT!!!!
See TIGHAR thread etc.
10A sounds like generic electrical; it looks like a 40’s/50’s generic shorting plug too.
Pilot was Capt G Hinckley: he was taken to Croydon General Hospital (9 March issue of Nottingham Journal)
You FORGOT what an awesome sound they make?!! My mind is for shizzle these days but that memory won’t shift for a loooong time (I hope) 🙂
It’s not in any colours on my screen: showing only monotone?
There seems to be a lot of belated hand-wringing and sanctimony occurring in later posts. As with many things, there seems to be no black-and-white about this, but a look at the USS Arizona Memorial might provide a good impression of how and why some artefacts need to be left where they are.
Interesting: the photo doesn’t correspond to the comment made at post #6. Looks much as it was when it was in Eric Heywood’s care at Hurn.