Can’t understand why it is taking so long to get her flying again?
To overhaul a Spitfire that has not flown in a significant number of years (and in the UK to CAA requirements) takes a considerable amount of time, money and effort. Engine and prop overhauls will be needed, not to mention all the systems and instuments etc. I assumed it would be at least two years work once it arrived in the UK and got underway – these things take time and they have to be right.
I saw the prototype of the book on Friday at DX, thanks to Mk12.
Ah – the ‘Holy Grail’….
The last sentence suggests that little has changed!
Err yes, for a moment it looked like a significant re-think.
More info and Permit holder comments here: http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2042/Synopsis%20-%20LoC%20-%20Ex-mil%20Final.pdf
No, but it does look very nice 😉 Should be out and about soon.
Look forward to seeing her 🙂
It does have wing tanks – but visitors to the Battle of Britain show last September will recall they were unuseable at the time (hence the short display using the fuselage tank only). Presumably these tanks will now be repaired or replaced.
Don’t forget new pipes,hoses, fittings, ags,etc
Yes – absolutely true!
What im asking is what makes this “it’s original” is it totally complete as it was in 1945 or just the block?
Apart from replacement rocker covers and minor items such as ignition harness, plugs etc, its the original engine fitted in 1945. Its actually a 1943 unit having been overhauled by Rolls-Royce and re-issued to the RAF prior to installation in PL965 in 1945.
If it was, it’s odd that it’s still not been uploaded to the SACAA website, which is still currently listing the only report as the Interim one.
Update – yes its the one titled interim at http://www.caa.co.za/resource%20center/accidents%20&%20incid/reports/2009/ZU-BEX.pdf My mistake – as the document is ten pages long with photos and diagrams I incorrectly assumed it was the final report. My apologies.
23 minutes – brilliant – thanks!! Much appreciate the info.
He normally does it much quicker than that !!
I believe it was published a couple of months ago – but I don’t have a direct link to hand I’m afraid.
With my Architects hat on – I would very much agree with Pagen’s suggestion of Odiham – based mainly on the matching buildings in the background and their relationship with the tanker building. Certainly beyond reasonable doubt given the evidence.
This thread could go on – I think its a very interesting subject in terms of the present day ‘warbird movement’. I seem to recall there were P-51’s in ‘Patton – Lust for Glory’ dressed as enemy aircraft but would have to check on that…..
The Spitfire Mk 1 in the IWM is not at all representative of its ‘original’ paint – it was re-finished in 1944. However it is extremely interesting in its own right as representative of a later wartime scheme, complete with comprehensive (although not factory applied) stenciling. The same goes for the Mk 1 in the Chicago museum.
I think some of the surviving (but largely complete) wrecks such as RK858 and PT879, at least in terms of Spitfires, tell us much more about how the factory applied paint schemes in period.
the stuka of RLM has NEVER been in that collection( i know this from a person who has been there at the end of it existance)
Did’nt Bruce say exactly the same thing in the post above yours, 20 months ago? :rolleyes:
Fabulous work Ronnie (as usual!!) 🙂
Unlike many on here I do not know you personally, only of you, so my very best wishes for a very happy birthday and a very happy Christmas Day, tomorrow.
Same here – but want to wish you a very happy birthday anyway – always read your posts with great interest! 🙂