re james mays programme some weeks ago, surely its feasable to construct a stirling using the same methods etc ,this would then give more impetus to the project as there would be a solid example to spur the initative along and afford people the opportunity to view this much maligned aircraft quicker than waiting for the rebuild/construction to be completed,which is likely to be some time.

Yes, anything is possible, but what would this achieve, other than having a 1:1 scale plastic model to paint?

I know all of the project members well, and they have great impetus to progress the project already, and have all of the necessary skills to see it through. So much has already been made, and lots more is underway. Not to tie them down to a timeframe, but a full flightdeck is under construction, and 3D CAD is already close for the complete forward fuselage. The whole point of re-creating an extinct type is to bring together as many original parts and put them back into context. This would be within a correctly made airframe, or major secion thereof.

Already the project has built up an instrument panel, front turret, flying controls, and the pilots seat and supporting structure is underway. There are tons of other airframe parts collected also. With suitable jigs constructed, a forward fuselage shell should be possible next.

There are so many differences between aircraft manufacturers methods, even type to type from the same company, that a correctly made new-build is there for future generations to learn from. You simply can’t preserve the same airframe construction methodology in a plastic reproduction.

Meteor TT.20 WM224

During the conservation work carried out on the cockpit structure on Meteor WM224 in the late 80’s, lines of poetry were found written in pencil on the inner skins. The Meteor cockpit is double skinned, so this would have only been possible before during manufacture at Armstrong Whitworth around 1951..

Hornet 130/131 and 134/135 engines

The Hornet Merlin 130 series engines were indeed handed. This was achieved on all production aircraft by reversing the direction of propeller rotation on the right hand engine, by the use of an additional idler gear.

This extra idler gear made the RH engine nacelle approximately 3/4″ longer than its LH counterpart. In both cases the crank rotated in the same direction.

The additional length of the RH engine was accomodated with an extension to the front edge of the engine nacelle as shown below.

I have read the interview and it clearly states there is a president in the YAK 3 and 9 these aircraft are new biuld and have been re-engined with allisons fitted with hamilton standard props? G-CDBJ is an example. It operates on a permit not a C of A. I am not aware of anyone on the forum having first hand knowledge (please enlighten me if you do!) of what either has of hasn’t been done with view to getting the aircraft on the UK register.

This may appear to have set a president, but for a good reason: The first new-build YAK 3M’s are made by Yakovlev in Russia in 1992, using the original tooling and drawings, and incorporate modern avionics and an Allison engine. If the original manufacturer has supported this modification, then maybe it is easier for subsequent new-builds of that type to get certified, because the OEM (Original equipment manufacturer) has already validated the conversion.

Its a new aircraft type in effect and as such would require complete type authorisation as its too heavy to be placed in the homebuilt PFA catergory. Such an excercise would be very difficult, time consuming and costly to justify for one example. If the aircraft was a restored original with a BMW engine it would qualify for Permit operation being an ex-military aircraft but in the case of the Flugwerk replicas, not so.

Mark V has made the point clearly regarding this Flugwerk replica – readers of this thread take note! The CAA may be seen as the ogre stopping airshow attendees photographing something exotic in the UK skies, but they are acting in everyones safety. Its a new type, that just happens to resemble a German Warbird. There may be a large amount of commonality in the design and construction between old and new, but the rules are clear – if you improve, redesign, or make a make a new type you need to do the (paper)work and this costs time and money.

These are great looking replicas, but in hindsight to sell one in the UK Flugwerk should have either created these as re-builds from existing wreckage, or only aimed them at the US market under their experimental category. Even if they had been classed as re-builds/restorations of originals, putting a different engine onto this would still have required new certification in the UK.

After your comment I posed the question on the ScotAvNet forum about which Hornets had been recorded there.

The reply from Douglas Rough was:-

Hi Elaref,

Thanks for this. I’d lost Doug’s email address in the early noughties. I take it you are still in touch with him. Pass on my regards.

I have VR850 & VR856 logged as there

Did you get photos of these Sea Hornets too?

I would be interested to see how VR856 got there as it was written off after it ran off the end of the runway at Hal Far in Malta?

Isn’t this a Hornet/Sea Hornet cockpit.?

No these are single seat Vampire cockpits.