I have noted references in several threads to the differences in certification procedures in Europe, the UK and the USA. The implication seems to be that “life is easier” over the pond. Is this the case or are the regulations just as rigorous? If not, why not?
Yes it is – warbirds in the US are generally operated in the Experimental and Limited catergories. The invasiveness of the regulatory authorities in to the restoration/operation processes is significantly less, in partcular with respect to the former catergory, compared with the UK. Moreover there is no equivelant airworthiness catergory to Experimental here at all.
I fear the person who asked the original question has never restored a plane or car.
I think thats why he asked the question! 🙂
There are some interesting points of view here. To put all this in to perspective you have to consider how these aeroplanes were manufactured in the first place and compare with how they are re-manufactured/restored today. In WWII it was done an a colosal scale and each factory had hundreds of suppliers providing anything from complete structures to an individual instrument. Today it is a tiny industry in comparison and even the largest restoration shops have only a limited chain of collaborators/suppliers. There are some parts that are to a limited degree available ‘off the shelf’ – mainly fixings and sheet metal. Anthing else has to be sourced and it is highly depenedent on the size of the restoration shop as to how many parts they are able/willing to purchase in advance of a project to have sitting and waiting around. The specialist Mustang/Spitfire restorers will of course try to obtain parts as they become avaiable to them as there is a greater liklihood of them finding a use sooner rather than later, but its a cripplingly expensive business to aquire parts and have them sit around waiting to be used.
So why does it take so long – well I would argue that the man hours to put together any WWII period aircraft are probably not hugely dissimilar now compared to when they were first built – its simply the scale of industry and available resources in WWII that were able to compress a 25,000 to 30,000 hour manufacturing process in to a day or two that now takes three or four years.
Of course there are other factors affecting time too – the financing of the project being the most significant and which can vary enormously from project to project.
Looks like a Mk.IX. Are such artefacts ‘Survivors’ in the accepted term – or does ‘The Book’ need a supplement, ‘Wrecks & Relics’ to list this and similar examples – with apologies to Ken Ellis of course!
I thought Tom Blair’s Dora had that modified V-1710?
It did!
I was going to measure the PR.XI but then realised the dimension is probably a little different from a Mk.IX due to the retractable tail wheel?
Yes you could eat your lunch off the floor there its so clean – however there is also a very good dining room serving excellent fare so its not really necessary! See you on Tuesday Matthias!
Peter Cooke has scratch-built a 1:24th scale Lancaster, of which pictures can be seen in “The Master Scratchbuilders”.
Is he the same guy I would have read about in Scale Models magazine in the late 70’s? I recall he did a Spitfire 14, a Sea Fury and perhaps a Tempest in 1/24 scale and all were superbly detailed – for the time anyway. He also did very nice scale line drawings of his model subjects and some interesting articles too.
PS: What is the book in your link?
Err, thanks Daz, but no thanks…. – so, what’s it doing in Historic Aviation then??
‘It’ refers to the forthcoming Spitfire Survivors book (see link in post no.6 by G-ORDY). Daz’s posting was pure, err, humour!
Spitfire PR XI PL965, sold and restored to airworthiness but destroyed in a fatal crash in 2001 (being rebuilt?)
Definately not PL965 – you mean PL983. The word ‘destroyed’ rarely applies to Spitfires – this one is indeed being slowly restored to fly again. PL965 is the aircraft with Hangar 11 Collection at North Weald, currently close to the end of a major refurb.
The Hurricane however is indeed the example currently flying at OW.
One of my favourite warbird photos EVER is of ‘863, low and fast on a wingtip at Wanaka several years ago.
Surely not as good as the one in my avatar 😮
The picture earlier in this thread of a spitfire with the code letters FUP can anyone tell me what a/c this is as I cannot recollect seeing this one before
Its Mk XVI, TB863 (ex G-CDAN), now Australia based but formerly for many years with the Alpine Fighter Collection at Wanaka, New Zealand – its the same one in my avatar!
I know what you mean – but its the way of the world. At least the people who have contributed to a project know their own input was valuable, credited or not.
L.F and H.F designations are only in relation to the originally installed engine, ie: the Merlin 70 in a H.F.IX.
And? They are congratulating Mike Nixon on his success, as they are apparently friends. Whats the problem?
Yes thats basically it, they have a close working relationship with Mike and Jose.