I remember having read somewhere that an Helldiver is being restored to static in Italy. Does someone know something about it ?
I was just saying, if I had to prepare for instance a quality walkaround for a book on the B-25, it would be very hard to find one aircraft which would really look like a WWII one, relating to the accuracy of its markings and its colors. On the contrary to British warbirds, whoses finishes are almost always spot on concerning paintings and markings.
P.S. I would too dream to see one day a Buchon fly in its marvellous silver or blue Spanish airforce finishes !
There’s something I don’t quite understand.
For the B-25, there are hundreds if not thousands of authentic and colorful finishes available, all perfectly documented, and it seems it’s almost impossible to find one Mitchell with an accurate WWII finish.
“….with people preserving paint and interior that really should be replacedc. “
For me, the very best way of preserving/restoring aircrafts is what the Fleet Air Arm Museum did with its Corsair and its Martlet.
It’s simple, I’ve no pleasure to look at an authentic aircraft, which nevertheless looks like some kind of fiberglass replica.
Frankly, look at this beauty and tell me after I’m wrong ;-))))
http://www.aafo.com/prints_D_L/art/Happy_Jack%27s_AAFO_Print1.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fun_flying/2817551027/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/harrygaydosz/2736742258/sizes/o/
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/aircraft-names-2232-2.html
Authentic finishes, applied with respect to the real thing are so much better than “fun” rich dentist glossy “I can do what I want with my money” toys.
About these three arguments, classical in this kind of discussions.
1: And if you owned a aircraft, you’d probably paint it in glossy paint too to protect its finish…
2: But unless you have a warbird, don’t complain about it…
3: Simple… Their money, their choice…
Your money, your choice…
1: Usually, if one has the money to buy a 1-2 millions dollars aircraft, one has also to money to let it hangared and not stay in the open air.
Also, I remember the guy who recently painted a Yak-3 in a very classy matte grey finish telling that a matte paint is not really more fragile than a glossy one.
2: I don’t agree with this argument: something that is shown to the public is, by nature, offered to the critics.
3: this is right, but if I were a very rich man, I could also buy the Joconde and paint big moustaches on her face. Good taste is unhappily something that cannot be bought.
You probably noticed I was polite enough not to mention examples of bad taste π
So, to stay in a positive mind, I will mention some examples of very good taste about old aircraft I’m just thinking about.
– Paul Allen’s collection.
– The flyable Seafire 17.
– The newly restored Hurribomber.
This is really a typical problem with the US warbirds : so many of them are painted in glossy and unaccurate finishes, without much researches (1). Happily, this trend never got to the British warbirds scene.
But there are some exceptions, for instance the beautiful “Happy Jack” or this marvellous newly restored olive-drab P-40 N.
(1) especially true for the aircrafts wearing nose arts. There are hundreds if not thousands of perfectly documented and cool-looking authentic nose-arts possibilities, but owners are nevertheless still painting on their aircrafts wrong or modern-designed nose arts.
I don’t get it, this passion on US aircrafts for ΓΌber-polishing, making in the end the aircrafts look no more like mean war machines but like funny big toys.
Just curious, is the finish of the Liberty Belle historically authentic, I can’t find any WWII pics of this aircraft? I’m asking this, because the design of the pin-up looks very modern to me.
Other question I’m always asking myself about these warbirds: why are they today silver painted, as they were left natural metal during WWII?
Just gorgeous this way!
This Yak looks absolutely beautiful, especially when it’s so rare (except for British-built aircrafts) to see warbirds with really historically accurate paintings and, of course, matte finishing!
Thanks a lot for the infos, Roger, exactly what I needed π
Thanks a lot, Archer, for the pic.
In fact, I just remember that there was a topic with new pics about this school on this forum, but I can’t find it again with the search tool!
Isn’t it much better to see so rare and beautiful aircrafts, on their wheels, on the ground and able to be towed outside for special events?
What was the point in painting it and putting it back together then scrapping it???
Any photos of the Lancaster around?
Aircraft preservation in Switzerland is an history of lost occasions and mistakes (for instance, I’m thinking of the second P-16 prototype scrapped just to take a few panels for the restoration of the first one) π