It’s been a while since I looked at my Hendon photos, but wasn’t there a P-51 hidden in the Bomber Hall (well, anything’s hidden there with that lighting 😉 ) before they got ‘The Duck’ from the US? What happened to that one, I seem to remember it was a composite from several P-51s?
I was down there earlier this year and noticed that particular F-104. I tried taking a photo on the way back, but from a moving car and with a small digicam I can tell you: the results aren’t worth looking at!
The place looked like a temporary storage area, I never realized that it was its permanent home. 😮
I seem to remember that she also has some creases in the aft fuselage area from incorrect lifting during moving or reassembly or something. That might mean a complete straigthening out of her fuselage.
Regarding I-16s and I-153s the story seems to be quite clear, 6 I-16s and three I-153s were restored/built in Russia, as described on these pages:
http://www.nzfpm.co.nz/aircraft/i16.htm
http://www.nzfpm.co.nz/aircraft/i153.htm
(The articles linked at the bottom of these pages are quite interesting by the way!)
Some of these aircraft have been sold, but as the photo above illustrates there are a few still available in NZ. As for the I-15bis, it seems that a different ‘production run’ for this type has been set up, with at least two (probably three) examples completed.
By the way, is it just me or does ‘Red 23’ appear to be a two-seater??? :confused:
I still think it is amazing how many ‘long forgotten’ types are reappearing in the skies these days!

Thinking of twin Mustangs, is it true that the pilot would tend to roll the aircraft around the axis of his fuselage, causing the radar operator in the other side to be thrown around the sky in a less graceful fashion. Or is this the aviation equivalent of an ‘urban myth’….. Just curious, any ideas?
Probably a myth, the aircraft will always roll around its center of gravity, which is between the two fuselages. It might have felt strange to the pilot at first, but to roll the aircraft around the left fuselage would need a lot of strange control inputs I’m guessing!
Heres 3 griffon powered Mustangs
Actually only the first two started out as Mustangs! The third one is a custom fuselage with Learjet wings and horizontal tail if I remember correctly.
Still thinking about my entry, but there’s some serious competition here already! 😀 😀
Interesting to see side by side:
Interesting read Martin, guess this means that this one is in need of a repaint. :rolleyes:
You mean like two wing rads and a chin rad? Or a spraybar like many Reno aircraft?
Bit of a late reply, but yes, something like that. Although I doubt that the Buchon could accomodate that.
The wing of the Me109/Buchon is quite small compared to a Spit for example, and the radiators installed there are quite thin/shallow (see photo posted on page 2 of this thread of the parked Buchon). You can tell from the same photo that there is an additional radiator installed in the nose for the Merlin installation. That means that going from the DB engine to the Merlin they needed to add radiator area already and decided not to modify the wings for this (probably to avoid having to do some major aerodynamic redesign work there). Perhaps they kept all the radiators in the wings and the chin houses the oil cooler, I don’t know but the fact is there that they needed more cooling capacity.
So now you’d want to move to another engine which has 10 liters more capacity and you want to run that at racing power settings as well? Expect to have to add something P40-like to the nose, or a complete redesign of the wing rads! Spray bars are an option but remember that you need to accomodate both the bigger engine and the racing settings, I’m guessing that just running a P-51’s Merlin at racing settings with stock radiators already neccesitates a spray bar system with quite a bit of capacity. Added problem: where are you going to stick your water tank? You need both room and CG margin for this.
Conclusions: A Buchon/Me109 airframe just isn’t capable of handling anything bigger than a Merlin in my opinion. Especially since I haven’t even discussed airframe strength and stability issues yet!
Anyway, it’s always fun to discuss stuff like this. But don’t let my ramblings distract from an interesting thread like this :rolleyes:
It would have had to be a Merlin I guess, the Buchon airframe just doesn’t have the room, both size-wise and CG-wise to accomodate a Griffon (in my view). Also you’d need some major addition to the radiator capacity to keep everything cool up front.
Couldn’t think offhand of any contra prop Merlins, but they did exist then?
Interesting aircraft James.
Has all the usual mods you would expect on a racer: big engine(Griffon?) with contra prop to eliminate torque. Larger rudder and added fin area to restore stability issues. Hacksawed off wingtips, gear doors, canopy modification and what looks like a retractable tailwheel too.
All the stuff you would want when you’re aspiring to go really fast around a pylon, but end up spreading multi-coloured bits of aluminium around the Nevada countryside. Surely there must be cheaper ways to kill oneself :rolleyes:
Looks like a contra-prop to me too, but then it would almost have to be a Griffon, and I’ve never heard of one of those on a Buchon, although one’s never too old to learn of course!
Daz, get to grips with the controls on your monitor and at least get the Kalamazoo example correct will you? 😀
hmmm… would make an interesting replica!
I reckon you could easily convert an Isaacs Spit into a Miles M.20 lookalike! 😀
Go for it Daz!! 😀 😉 :p
Quick and dirty guess: Koolhoven Fk-51? (Probably not)
It’s Fokkered up, that’s what it is!
In my own (limited) experience I have used a chisel to remove hinges from panels by knocking off the rivets. Since the hinges were scrap anyway this was the quickest way, did cost me a (home made) chisel though! Drilling off the head as explained above is still the best way I think.