East Kirkby for sure.  There is a real sentiment within the museum management that it could/should fly again.

“It’s a difficult balance, but the Lancaster always takes priority, whether it is funds or time – she is the heart of what we do and the reason we are here. The Mosquito comes next, while the B-25 ‘bimbles’ along in the background. We typically have a two-man team working on the Mitchell, but we do plan to expand that.”

The port Wright Cyclone R2600 radial engine looks immaculate, despite not having run since 1979. “They could run,” Andrew says. “The problem with radials is that if they are left fixed to an aircraft for that amount of time with the propeller attached, the weight of prop forces the bearings into the bearing face. Now, some say you might get a few hours out of them if you’re not flying them, while most say it’s not even worth turning [them] over. To run them we would have to get them both overhauled in the US.”

That the Mitchell could be made airworthy again is largely down to the care it received during its lengthy tenure with the RAFM: “From the survey we carried out, it can be made airworthy relatively simply – especially compared to the Lancaster. It would be a comparatively quick thing to do, but what we don’t want to do is take funds from the Lancaster and not get them back.

“To get it to taxiable standard, it would cost in the region of $200,000 to overhaul the engines and propellers. We have two spare engines that are currently in Canada and it’s likely that they would be sent for overhaul if we went down that route. It wouldn’t cost that much more to get the airframe flying. It’s a bit of a ‘Catch-22’ – if you’ll pardon the B-25 related pun! If you’re spending that amount anyway, you might as well spend $400,000, because it would be worth that much when airworthy. It’s something we’d like to do given time and funds.”

In the grand scheme of things, it would be a good aeroplane to potentially get airborne before the Lancaster and would ultimately help Just Jane do the same: “It would give us a multi-engine training and currency capability, albeit not tailwheel. Of course, we would have to install a longer runway, but that is something we have already planned for to get the Lancaster into the air. Personally, I’d love to see it fly.

Andrew Panton

What a shame, and a waste.

Amazing and depressing to be scrapping very intact Second World War era airframes, 80 years on. 

This is the airframe now to be seen under construction at Hawkinge.  The team are doing great work. 

Many thanks.

A very comprehensive answer !

What are the differences? Are they mainly avionics?

Elliott made a short presentation at the Historic Aircraft Association annual symposium at Hendon on Saturday, and I think did very well with sales. I bought one, my friend bought three(!) and many others were buying also.

To say magazine hardly does it justice, it is really a book with soft covers. In my opinion, it is the most lovingly designed, stylishly presented body of aviation literature that I can recall. It could only have been compiled by people with a deep understanding and love of vintage aviation.

A couple of years ago, I posted on here that the content of their  website was too good simply to hang ( and eventually disappear) in the virtual world, and it is very pleasing to see it now turned into a permanent and accessible form, to dive into and cherish. 

Welcome to the Forum.

This is the 2019 thread to which you refer, I think 

Hawker Hurricane L1700 Crashed near Saul Gloucestershire |

Maybe some of the original diggers will see this, and point you to where they made their excavation.