There was an article in Aeroplane Monthly last year about the restoration, so it would be public domain.
I think you will find that the FW190 has flown to another warmer location, in the US to be finished- Gosshawk Unlimited Case Grande, Arizona.There were recent pictures of it in Warbirds International.MRP
Yes, apparently this completed FW190 restoration has also been recently purchased by Mr. Paul Allen. This means that there are good things to come regarding this aircraft’s future display/flying status. Mr. Allen is really, really low-key regarding his WWII aircraft acquisitions/restorations, but his unique and heartfelt “deep pockets” dedication to WWII aircraft preservation demands high commendation from us warbird enthusiasts :).
– octane130 –
As promised, here is one of several amusing tales from an original Me-262 pilot, Mr. Hans Busch, as related to the audience at one of the Planes of Fame Museum’s (Chino, Calif.) monthly seminars (2001). I audio-recorded many of those fascinating seminars and still have the recordings.
Hans stated that he was definitely not a fighter pilot, but rather a bomber pilot in the Me-262. Hitler’s ridiculous utilization of many of these advanced aircraft as “bombers” proved futile, as this aircraft had no bomb sight at all and carried only a tiny ordnance load. Bombing with a 262 was totally a blind, hit or miss proposition, no technology involved.
Tale No.1: Hans related an amusing story regarding routine fueling operations in the Me-262. An obvious late-war shortage of men to perform ground operation duties resulted in a number of German women assisting in these activities. One activity was the refueling of the advanced Me-262 jets. One day, Hans was having his Me-262 refueled (as he sat in the cockpit) by a particularly attractive, blonde, buxom, young Luftwaffe airwoman. The airwoman, per prescribed procedure, began the fueling of the aircraft with the forward fuselage tank and, at the same time, Hans and young airwoman making eyes at each other. When the forward fuselage tank was full, aforementioned blonde, buxom airwoman proceded to transfer the fueling hose nozzle to the rear fuselage tank, and due to not shutting off the fuel flow, soaked the following items in noxious German WWII jet fuel in this order: front fuselage, windscreen, Hans, rear cockpit, canopy and rear fuselage, all in one, smooth, fluid motion. Not one change in the airwoman’s cheerful expression was noted by Hans during this wayward procedure :).
Apparently, according to Hans, this German jet fuel was terribly noxious. You simply threw away any clothes that came in contact with it. Interestingly, Hans stated that there was NEVER a shortage of jet fuel, just a shortage of aircraft and pilots. Whatever hydrocarbon fuel cracking process being used by the Germans in late war (whether synthetic, coal-derived fuels or conventional), the process or processes yielded an abundant quantity of jet-suitable fuel.
More Me-262 stories to come!
Best,
– octane130 –
Yes, I understand some posters’ concerns about being able to view digital images long-term due to the constant changes in imaging and format technologies. However, I have a small group of slide images that I will permanantly keep in their orignal form (slides) and these O-47 images are included. I also keep duplicates of everything digital in bitmap, jpeg, on DVD, flash drive, hard drive, etc. in full anticipation of changing technologies.
Just as an aside, I always used Kodachrome 64 (even Kodachrome 25) slide film back then 30 years ago wherever possible. There also existed for a short time a Kodachrome 200 and I know I that I used it, but I cannot tell which Kodachrome slides these are now since they are all just imprinted “Kodachrome.” As I knew back then and just as expected, after 30 years, the Kodachrome slides (“substantive emulsion”) exhibit no deterioration at all, whereas the Ektachrome slides (“non-substantive emulsion”) now show noticeable deterioration in image quality. Kodachrome was the “king” of films.
Best,
– octane130 _
I’ll continue to post more of my old slides that I think will be of interest to viewers, and I have a bunch :).
Wasn’t it a O-47 that was used in the final scenes of the 1965 ‘Flight of the Phoenix’ due to the original plane crashing, killing Paul Mantz?
Yes, as JDK posted, this is the very same aircraft that was used in the “Flight of the Phoenix” as a stand-in aircraft. The aircraft was on loan from “The Air Museum” in Ontario, Calif. The museum moved to nearby Chino, Calif. in the late ’70s and is now, of course, the renowned Planes of Fame museum.
– octane130 –
True to his promise, Glacier Girl’s owner Rod Lewis is really making a big effort to show this wonderful aircraft at many venues. GG also made an appearance at the Reno Air Races and at the Gathering of Mustangs in Ohio during September 2007. The below photo shows GG once again at the Planes of Fame Museum in Chino, California in early September 2007. As always, pilot Steve Hinton is still the only one allowed to fly GG.
Best,
– octane130 –
Thanks, jimflint80 for posting those photo links of Darrel Greenamayer’s Red Baron Lockheed F-104! Old memories were brought right up to the surface. I remember seeing THIS Red Baron taking off from Mojave, California in what must have been 1978. First of all, even those that have been privileged enough to have seen an ordinary F-104 take-off would have just been blown away by a take-off from this extemely light-weight, home-built Starfighter! Darrel flew the F-104 at extremely low altitude for just a few seconds after takeoff and then, still in afterburner, pulled the aircraft vertical and performed an immediate “Immelmann.” The aircraft then proceeded to intended destination in the opposite direction. Simply jaw-dropping! This is the kind of thing that U.S. civil pilots could get away with performing at a remote, “uncontrolled” airport such as Mojave on an ordinary day. This was and is strictly verboten at other airports. Mojave is an ex-US Marine Corps Air Station located just outside the limits of the famous Edwards Air Force Base.
By the way, Darrel was banned by the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) from flying the F-104 from his local base, Van Nuys Airport in SoCal, USA. One reason was that the F-104 could awaken the dead with its extreme noise levels from the General Electric J79 turbojet engine in a very dense population area and second, this was a dangerous aircraft—-period. The F-104 had to be trucked up to Mojave for flight activities. Darrel was very vociferous in his complaints regarding this. I remember following this on the local television news broadcasts. There was the F-104 perched up on a flat-bed truck in the background.
Darrel received the J79 engine for his project from an “anonymous” donor. Hmm, I wonder who that may have been :).
The ejection seat that he purchased in an Army-Navy surplus store in Oceanside, California was later responsible for saving his life when the landing gear on this aircraft would not extend. You really do not belly-land an F-104 and live to tell about it. Following the ejection and crash of the F-104, Darrel matter-of-factly carried his parachute out to the nearest Mojave Desert road and caught a ride from a local resident back to civilization. Hey, no big deal to him 😮 .
Best,
– octane130 –
Here are a few more photos of the fabulous Red Baron RB-51 that you might enjoy. These were taken in 1979, just a very short time before its total destruction at the Reno air races that year. Thankfully, pilot Steve Hinton miraculously survived.
Best,
– octane130 –




Here is a link to accident footage that I edited which was first presented on Aero-News Network. It is hard to watch………….. Despite previous discussions, it is pretty obvious what the circumstances were that lead to the accident.
If you are interested, some new material has been posted on the Planes of Fame Museum’s (Chino, Calif., USA) message board (under the heading “Past Planes of Fame Airshows”) regarding this incredible and rare B-29 aircraft. I personally saw this aircraft appear four times in SoCal USA in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It is no longer flying but check out the old photos and discussion on the Planes of Fame Museum’s message board at: http://www.planesoffame.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=485
Feel free to add any info or comments that you wish!!
Cheers,
– octane130 –
Dateline Goose Bay, Labrador, Canada:
The latest word is that Glacier Girl has both of her new engines mounted as of today, Friday July 20! Just a few details such as hose clamps, etc. need to be finished up. That was really fast work but with such a talented crew (Steve and John Hinton, Bob Cardin, Jim Dale, owner Rod Lewis, and others), not really a surprise.
There was a problem with the U.S. shipper that was to deliver the aeromotive engine oil to Goose Bay. They wanted $6000 to deliver the oil from New York to Goose Bay. I don’t know if that also involved some substantial import duties into Canada but the crew obviously and appropriately said “forget it” to this highway robbery and found a more nearby, domestic source. As of today, the oil had not yet arrived but it was on its way. This will teach me not to complain about the US$19.00 for my automobile oil change at Jiffy Lube, ha! 🙂
Glacier Girl may fly tomorrow, Sat. July 20. Tentative plans (very tentative) are for Glacier Girl to fly to Oshkosh, Wisconsin next week for the big AirVenture gathering. Completing the trip to England this year is out, but maybe next year, who knows?
Cheers,
– octane130 –
While I’m on a roll :), below are some interesting facts about the Smithsonian Institution’s Focke-Wulf FW-190 F-8 aircraft. I read an extensive article in the early ’80s in Smithsonian Magazine about the restoration of this historic aircraft. The Smithsonian back then was probably the most committed organization in the world to restoring aircraft as close as possible to their original condition.
Restoration began in 1980 when specialists began sanding through layers of postwar paint applied in the U. S. to uncover the original German Luftwaffe paint and markings. The sanding process exposed something of the rich history of this artifact. It flew first as a Fw 190A-7 fighter but Focke-Wulf later rebuilt it as a F-8 ground-attack fighter-bomber. The aircraft wore at least three different camouflage schemes and a manufacturer’s data plate found inside the fuselage indicated that its first Werk-Nummer (serial number) was 640 069. Infrared photographs of the aircraft’s vertical stabilizer revealed that after rebuild, Focke-Wulf assigned the airframe a new Werk-Nummer 931 884. Restoration concluded in 1983. The final paint and markings applied were historically accurate for this specific airframe: SG 2 (Schlagtgeschwader or Ground-Attack Squadron 2) during October 1944. Unlike most captured WWII aircraft, this aircraft was never flown following capture.
At the start of the restoration in 1980, it was discovered that the aircraft still had the ORIGINAL, synthetic, coal-derived fuel in the tanks! It was determined that this fuel was not at all deteriorated and could have still been used to run the engine, even after 35 years! Apparently, this fuel also has a very distinctive, permeating, clinging and nauseating odor to it. I have also personally heard this from German WWII pilots. This fact was also noted by Allied pilots flying recently captured German aircraft at the end of WWII, as well as the Smithsonian restorers in the early ’80s.
Also, when replacement bearings for the elevator control surfaces were needed, the original manufacturer FAG in Germany was contacted, just out of curiosity. This exact model of bearing was still being produced in the early 1980s!
Cheers,
– Octane130 –
With respect to attendance/viewing figures of static, museum-bound aircraft vs flying examples:
The Collings Foundation of Massachusetts operates two to three aircraft on a nation-wide tour every year (B-24, B-17 and B-25). They have done this for 17 years and estimate that up to 4 million people view these aircraft each year! Thousands also get to actually fly in these aircraft for a substantial, but not really outrageous donation amount ($375.00 to $425.00). Considering that a B-17 costs at least $4,000.00 per hour to operate, this is not unreasonable. Nobody makes a profit and nobody cares. The Collings Foundation is officially designated as a “non-profit organization” by the US government for taxation purposes (i.e. no taxation). This tax exempt status has also allowed a great many other warbirds to be restored, survive and operate in the USA. The Collings Foundation figured that if the aircraft were put on static display in Massachusetts, they might attract 40,000 visitors per year.
To put these attendance/viewing figures in perspective, IWM Duxford only attracts approx. 443,000 visitors per year (yes, INCLUDING the airshows). Once the most visited museum in the world, the Smithsonian’s Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C. attracts 5 million visitors per year. The new museum annex, the Udvar-Hazy Center (where the B-29 Enola Gay is housed) attracts 1 million per year. The British Museum attracts approx. 6.2 million visitors per year. Considering the above figures, 4 million visitors/viewers per year for the tiny little 3-aircraft contingent of the Collings Foundation is pretty impressive, isn’t it? This is literally world class. And that was my original point, active aircraft reach many more people than static displays. Unless the airframe is a one-of-a-kind example, responsibly fly the aircraft as living history and then retire the aircraft to static display when it is no longer feasible to fly them.
It is also the philosophy of Paul Allen (see my previous posting just before this one) to occasionally have his meticulously restored jewels flown for the benefit of the public.
Thanks for the lively discussion,
– octane130 –
I’m sure I read somewhere that of all the many Mustang survivors not one is left in its original “in service” condition. That’s as wrong as saying we should stop flying old aeroplanes.
As far as absolutely original Mustangs that were put in a museum or storage right after shutting down from their last operational mission (1957 in the USA), yes, that is true. Fortunately, several very financially well-heeled enthusiasts have done a lot towards restoring and preserving examples of aircraft to as close to original condition as can possibly be achieved. One major enthusiast, Mr. Paul Allen (co-founder of Microsoft) is on an ALL-OUT MISSION to restore and preserve WWII aircraft in absolutely the most original condition as possible. Mr. Allen is really, really low-key about his warbird activities. Apparently, cost is not at all a limiting factor in these landmark restorations. This is an example of what “unlimited” funding can do. Check out his website at http://www.flyingheritage.com/
I don’t know if Mr. Allen is a pilot, but I do know for a fact that he never pilots any of the aircraft in his warbird collection. He is just dedicated to the heritage of these aircraft, much to the benefit of everybody :).
I have personally been able to observe the restoration of his P-51, P-47, B-25 and Zero. These aircraft (with the exception of the Zero) are usually detailed right down to the original electrical wire type (not really the best for safety, but amazing for originality).
Best,
– Octane130 –
David Burke:
I respect and appreciate your opinion. I am sure I don’t fully get the historical warbird picture that is present in the UK (although I have visited there 3 times and GREATLY enjoyed my “warbird” experiences, among all my other experiences 🙂 ). However; recognition of the USA’s WWII involvement at home here has (and frankly understandably so) been on the wane in recent years. The warbird and airshow movement (especially WWII warbirds) has been on a GREAT upswing in recent years, resulting in an increased awareness of the many millions of WWII veteren’s contributions to history. What more exciting than the sights and sounds of a Merlin-powered P-51 or P&W-powered P-47 to grab the attention of the younger generations? Airshows are now the No. 1 attraction in the USA, even greater than NASCAR (stock car) racing.
The most iconic war symbol of the USA, the warship USS Constitution which was christened in 1797 (and defeated the HMS GUERRIERE in the war of 1812, 😡 sorry!) is still an officially commissioned USA warship and yet is only 10 percent original in its construction. It is essentially a replica. NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY cares. Visiting the ship in Boston harbor is still a great experience to Americans, even those not particularly history minded. This is my point and I believe that this same feeling (for Americans at least) applies to aircraft. Those like you and me who study aircraft history are aware of their specific accomplishments (or lack thereof), the vast majority of people do not care. Just an example of a particular historic aircraft (fiberglass, original nonflyable, etc.) is significant, with flyable, roaring examples being much more grabbing. When no longer flyable, park them in a museum for future generations.
Thanks, my friend
– octane130 –
In my honest opinion, if it is flyable, fly it. Take lots of historical photos and videos and if it crashes, then put it in a museum. Those years of actual flying are of so much more historical significance than ANY static display. Unless it is a totally one-of-a-kind aircraft (and no other airframes exist), sitting on static display is quite useless and uninteresting to all and to the historical record. You could make a fiberglass replica that would serve the same purpose for static display.
For example, take the USA-based Collings Foundation that takes the world’s only flyable B-24 bomber, along with a B-17 and a B-25 on tour throughout the USA every year. You can purchase a seat on any of these aircraft (I have twice so done on all three aircraft). Nobody makes a profit and nobody cares. It is the great heritage of these aircraft that is carried on. I can’t tell you how many warbird-oriented people and their sons, daughters, etc. that I have met that have been impacted by just the Collings Foundation’s efforts. One day, it will not be financially viable to operate these aircraft. You can then stick them on static display; what was lost?—nothing. Nothing but great benefit was accomplished.
Best,
– octane130 –