I thought about this and got the six UK examples, and was going to add the New Zealand and Canadian ones as well. A quick google to confirm a serial tie up produced the following link to Wikipedia, which look good enough to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_surviving_Hawker_Hurricanes

only anti det flights i believe

Flights or just engine runs ? I was thinking that maybe the South African CAA might have withdrawn their permits to fly pending the final reports. I must have been a great shock, and personal loss, to all at Thunder City and hope that they have the heart and enthusiasm to continue.

Have asked this question before, but dont remember getting an answer.
Have any of the other Thunder City Lightnings flown since last years accident?

The TR-1 looks similar to the U-2 but it is a larger aircraft all round , I cannot see any significant comminality between the two apart from role , layout and manufacturer .

I would agree that the U-2R (f/f 28/08/67) bears little in common with the
U-2A (f/f 04/08/55) However the point being made was that U-2R production ended in 1969, after only 12 were built. New orders for the U-2R were issued in 1979, a total of 37 additional airframes were built. The name change to TR-1 was an attempt to get away from the 1960’s ‘Skyplane’ tag. The first new build was the ER-2 for NASA (f/f 11/05/81), the TR-1A (f/f 01/08/81) and the two seat TR-1B (f/f 23/2/83)

Excellent news !!!. Even the chance to have the unrestored fuselage on display at Cosford, maybe next to the Lincoln, is great news. When I last saw the Brigand at Kemble I thought that it needed a good clean and a bit of polish to make an acceptable display item. Does anybody have photos of the cockpit, how complete is it ? If in acceptable condition maybe an access platform could be built to allow visitor to see inside. Combined with a good visual / model display for what the RAF were up to post 1945. You only have to look back through this thread to see some really interesting photos and stories.

To fly requires materials and systems to be to modern standards and thus the aircraft requires certain modification in order to meet these standards. How often have we discussed ‘fire wall’ rebuilds or the loss of original material in the pursuit of airworthyness.
As has already been mentioned the museum world has its own set of rules and items have to be fitted into the right category in order for the academics to understand what is original, repaired or fake.

Just aw ild guess but might have been the RAF Falcons parachute team. The Herc usually did a low pass as the team saluted the crowd. I remember at an “off airfield site” and the low pass always seem more impressive as there is not the normal display line.