CHELMSFORD T.7 METEOR
The Chelmsford meteor is still there in its compound. (circa 31st July 2005)
Although now sporting incorrect (for the period) Blue and Red only roundals and fin flash. There is no white to be seen!
I’m inclined to agree with Bruce on this.
I have a feeling the side panels were temporarily refitted to stabilise the fuselage whilst fitting out was done
Lottery winner
It would have to ba a fighter DH Mosquito.
NF.II or FB.IV.
Tony A – thanks!
Tony
Thanks for posting the photos of 2005 cockpit fest.
dH Hornet F.1 cockpit
I will be arriving at Newark around lunchtime on the saturday. Looking forward to my first event.
Hornet F.1
I will be bringing the Hornet F.1 cockpit.
It really falls between the catagories of “cockpit” and “interior” at the moment, becuase it is small for one, and large for the other, but I really look forward to mixing it with all in attendance.
It is an ideal forum (pardon the pun!) to show the yearly progress made as parts and assemblies are added.
See you all there.
comparisons.
Captain Eric Brown went on to say that the Dornier was the fastest, but the Hornet was the bset “all round” fighter of the 3. In the very entertaining speach that he gave, I have never heard an aircraft being described as “over powered” either!!
max speed stats:
Dornier Do335 – 474mph
Twin Mustang P82 – 470mph
Hornet F.1 – 472mph
This was a production Hornet with full MS equipment. The Hornet prototype achieved 490mph. As the Dornier was actually a prototype too, this puts a different slant on the figures.
Hornet photo request!!!!
Hi Martin
Gues who’s battery run out on my camera on saturday!!
I would k*ll for a picture of Captain Eric “Winkle” Brown sitting in my Hornet F.1 cockpit. I wont say too much on this forum, because I believe that the Hornet 50th anniversary re-union will be officially covered by the “other” magazine, but it was a great event, much enjoyed by all in attendance.
popham
I’m hoping to go. 😀
Wildcat status.
Hi Dave T
Current status….good question? I saw it in August, looking exactly like it is in the photos. The restoration team work in this hangar. All of the plastic sheeting is to protect the airframe from the leaky roof! However, there was talk of their landlord (Martin Baker) not re-newing their lease, so by now it may well be in storage.
Can anyone give an update?
Wildcat
I went to see this last summer. It is truly a fantastic restoration.
Meteor NF.13
I helped to rescue this aircraft in 1990’ish.
It was laying dismantled on a farm in the West country, minus it’s centre section.
Unfortunately the group who got it, decided that after spending lots of money transporting it to Essex, and storing it for several years, they scrapped everything, leaving just the cockpit section!
It was a restorable airframe, the last of the NF.13 meteors produced.
cost of re-build
A bare airframe costs “X” to rebuild. (either metal or woodwork)
The systems (pneumatic, hydraulic, electrical, mechanical, engine, fuel, oil, water, etc.) cost significantly more. This is where the majority of the investment goes, which is why you see some airframe projects sold on before their systems are fitted out. There is a chance that the maker will see a return or profit on his/her investment at this point.
mosquito remains
Good Question!
Once you have scavanged all of the metal fittings and used the original woodwork as a 3D reference, you will have either picked the original to pieces, and reduced it to matchwood, or have two mosquitos on your hands, and transferred the data-plates.
The original fuselage (If saved) would still form a good exhibit in its own rite, if kept as it is. What would be the difference between this and the Halifax at Hendon? This is the tricky question of provenance, once again though.
They are doing a great job, however. I would much prefer to see a re-built mosquito fly, than rot in a shed somewhere.
My project could potentially use an original Sea Hornet rear fuselage in its construction, but these relics have laid in a field for decades before being rescued. They are reduced in strength and out of shape, and damaged. Once new bulkheads and skins have been replaced, what is original? The original relic has historical significance in its own rite, even though it is not complete, it represents a record of the design of the time. This is why I decided to do a newly built fuselage/cockpit to sympathetically display original parts.
examples
Several examples of complete restorations in the uk by professional companies could be named, where the original aircraft skins, damaged frames, etc, have now been built into new static airframes, or sold privately to collectors. This is good re-cycling and preservation of original parts, but it does ask the question, which is the more authentic one? However, I don’t want to start the debate about “authenticity” again.
Several examples of Spitfires and Hurricanes could be named in the UK. I don’t think that much gets scrapped in the UK though. If you have tooled up for making/restoring a one-off build, and you have 3 airframes to use. Basic economics says that you would try and find buyers for the other two, be it static, airworthy, or for parts for others projects. These restorations are expensive, and a collector is likely to pay more for a part with provenance from a historic aircraft, than the scrapman surely?