Or perhaps you would use the word ‘reproduction’. My definition of replica is an object that is created to take on the appearance of another. The Spitfire replicas in another thread have the appearance of a Spitfire (with varying levels of successs) but they do not have identical parts. A Spitfire constructed entirely of new parts wherein each part is indistinguishable from an original part is not in the same catergory. The Charles Church collection Spitfires were made in this way but were registered as ‘original’ aircraft because they had a significant percentage of original parts such as engine, instruments, wheels, oleo legs etc and the new parts were indistinguishable from old ones. The ‘original’ parts are fairly readily available (but extremely difificult to make new, particularly the engine!) and gave the finished aircraft, together with the data plate, a significant enough element of ‘originality’ (to avoid the reproduction/replica) classification. It therefore has to be considered a re-build project, albeit with a very significant amount of parts that are authentic but not as old as others.
Does it all just come down to the age of the parts and componenets?
Sign In
