I know someone who’s restoring an M1.C – it’s “no”, “no” and “yes” to your questions.
I know someone who’s restoring an M1.C – it’s “no”, “no” and “yes” to your questions.
London-Heathrow to Copenhagen-Kastrup as a regular, commercial flight possibly by an SAS DC-4, DC-6 or even a Saab Scandia or a BEA Viscount.
Copenhagen-Kastrup to Warsaw possibly by a LOT Ilyushin IL-12 (there’s a picture on airliners.net of one in Copenhagen taken in 1952).
Link to a Danish newspaper article about the recovery:
http://politiken.dk/indland/ECE1605376/sjaeldent-krigsfly-fundet-paa-vesterhavets-havbund/
According to the article, “the instruments were missing, their wires having been cut…. the wreck must therefore have been “visited” before…” and the parts are going to “Garnisonsmuseet” in Aalborg in Northern Jutland.
The museum is this:
I can’t understand the excitement about this.
What I see in the pictures are chunks of torn, twisted, encrusted and corroded aluminium.
As could be expected from making an emergency landing (as in “impact”) and remaining for almost 70 years on the seabed.
Moreover, there are no resources/interest in Denmark to fund a restoration of this scale, which has never been carried out before, least of all by the recovering organisation.
No need to check, those are real-life numbers directly from the horse’s mouth.
Many consider the Tecnam slow however, at around 130 Kts in the cruise. Your concept aircraft – even if it did get off the drawing board – would perhaps please designers and environmentalists but not those using it for transport. 90 Kts cruise is for fun and recreation only.
My local flying school has one, and it is indeed a VERY cool aircraft. It’s allegedly as easy to fly as a C172, consumes only 40 litres of MOGAS (not expensive AVGAS) per hour in the cruise, and operates with ease in and out of our 400 m paved runway. I also think of it as the spiritual successor to the Gemini.
Look in O’Leary’s book. It is clearly the same airframe, no doubt whatsoever about it.
Seconded.
Maybe the answer is a search for the Osprey F-86 book !
I have a couple of the Eighties Osprey Books, including some by Michael O’Leary. In one of them, there are some F-86 pictures with mention of the drone programme, including a picture of a derelict ex-Luftwaffe example with the code JA-120. There are however no aircraft recognisable as ex-RAF or ex Italian Air Force airframes.
I don’t have the impression that anyone is moaning.
The replies from those with practical experience in this field are trying to convey the message that vast sums of money are required, which no amount of enthusiasm and/or voluntary effort can compensate for, together with proposals as to how “vast” could be reduced to “a lot”.
Eric,
Thanks for the info. The revenue hire was mentioned earlier and I counted that under “visitors”. The reliance on that also seems risky to me, given the museum’s location. I go to The Hague fairly often and have nonetheless never managed to visit the museum. Despite the excellent Dutch train network, it seems like quite a daunting trip to get there from The Hague.
I’m keeping my fingers crossed for all concerned and interested!
56 (!) paid staff members (stated in another thread), as well as more expenditures associated with buildings and loads of aircraft being purchased, don’t match with a location off the beaten track and away from tourist concentrations.
I’m surprised that no eyebrows were raised before as far as the financial model is concerned. Museums relying on income from visitors only in order to survive have never fared well in Europe, cf. the Danish Aviation Museum which went bankrupt while located in Billund.
Very, very sad for the people involved and Dutch aviation enthusiasts. I sincerely hope that the aircraft go to good and appropriate homes.
Has anyone tried persuading Kermit weeks to sell his? He clearly will not be flying her.
Are there not doubts about the integrity of the wooden structure of this aircraft, after having spent time in humid Florida?
I seem to recall having read somewhere that the big stumbling block for any Mosquito restoration is that it is virtually impossible to determine the integrity of the plywood/balsa sandwich structure without destroying it? Is this correct… Bruce?
Just to add to this ancient thread, I heard today that Pacific Plywood of China has just secured the rights to cut a massive swaith of Papua New Guinea native forest to make into hardwood ply. I wonder what aeroplanes they might come across, and if they would care a jot about such historic items.
Anybody prepared to undertake such a perverse destruction of nature won’t care a bit about old pieces of bent aluminium. And, frankly, for the same reasons, the latter issue pales into total insignificance.
@twinotter: I’ll see what I can dig out of the basement, may not get around to it this side of Christmas but won’t forget…!
For the Monospar team in the meantime:
The museum displaying the aircraft was not involved in the actual restoration of the aircraft. This was done essentially single-handedly by a former employee of Skandinavisk Aero Industri (who built the KZ range of light aircraft), the late Ove Alexandersen, as a member of Dansk Flyvehistorisk Forening (Danish Aviation Historical Society). Have they been in touch with this organisation? I wouldn’t be surprised if they have something relevant in their archives. Contact them at info@danfly.dk