Fantastic FW 190 video

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Well, I think the debate has run it's course, just a couple points. I still disagree because I think you debate from a very narrow POV that puts preservation above all else and I think that should be put into perspective.

lol mine is a very narrow point of view? Since when preservation of original, unique pieces of history is being considered narrow viewed?
I do understand why you want that plane to be up in the sky again, but believe me, it's not feasible and it will never happen.

I suppose you've seen this video before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Y5LBUVS1T8

but if you haven't check out how hard it is to crank that machine up.

also, have a read at this for further insight in the story and how much work has been put into it (both right and wrong!)
http://www.indianamilitary.org/Freem...90D13/0118.htm

Planes like the Bell X and the Spirit of St. Louis are one of their kind and intended to be from the very start. They were built for a one special purpose, cross the Atlantic, break the sound Barrier. I do not think that compares to aircraft geared for serieal production.

Also, there are a few airplanes out there that were so ground breaking that their achievements are to be preserved at all costs, like the Wright Flyer (first powered aircraft), the Fokker E.I (first real fighter aircraft), Junkers F13 (First all metal aircraft), the FW200 (first trans-atlantic passanger aircraft) the Me262 (first jet), the SR71 (speed!) or the F117 (first real stealth aircraft), as they defined the future of flying in general. Keeping some of those also is of the highest importance.

Then there are airplanes that also defined the future, but are unfit for safe flying even if they were restored to flying condition, like the Go229 or the Salamander, due to the inherent design problems. Those also are no options.

Then there are aircraft that were in serial production, but individual aircraft nevertheless made history, sometimes because being piloted by famous people, sometimes because they became a symbol, sometimes because records were broken or their presence in important operations or events, the list goes on.

All these aircraft were important for humanity as a whole as they, in one way or another, had a direct and sometimes profound impact on history.

Lastly, there are some airplanes that were in serial production and the only reason why they are so valuable is that there aren't a lot of them left. That is their only achievement. The D13 or the Spad, for example, are in this category. These planes fought in a war amongst hundrets or thousands others. The D13 may be a bit more special because so few were built, but the sole reason for that was the end of the war and a lack of ressources. I more then understand the will to preserve their technical aspects, but imho, and stated several times before, that worth only counts to a very very small circle of people that have a way above average interest in their construction. And those very few people would be the only ones being sad if that plane was lost, most people would not even hear the news. If we talk about historic value, move away from the trees to actually see the forrest, their real potential is to carry on the impression and expirience of those "wars", which they can't by just sitting around.

I'm sorry, but you're telling me that the personal mount of Franz Götz, a Luftwaffe ace with 63 victories and a commander, which he flew until the end of the war and that in addition to that is of an extremely rare breed, doesn't qualify to you as important piece of history?

Would you then fly the BMW engined Ju88 at Hendon or the Me410 at Cosford too?

P.S. That Flugwerk D9 is to be powered by an Allision engine. Nice to see it in the air but as usual, not coming close to the real deal.

how do you assume that it's not close to the real deal? is it in terms of handling? Sound? manoeuvrability? Or is it just that fetishism you were blaming me of? The funniest thing is that I could take you to a flight line with Allison and Merlin powered P-40s and trust me, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference by just hearing them.
The Jumo engine sounds pretty much like a DB605, with the typical "turbo whine" and a low grumble tone, one wouldn't probably be able to tell the difference between a Ju88 and a Fw190D engine running.
You don't seem to have an understanding of the conception of safety, to you the importance of flying a rare machine just because you want it overcomes anything else. That's not the right mentality my friend

Once again, you find a FW190 frame, or a Stuka, or a Sturmovik one that is incomplete and can come back to the sky? Cool! But flying such a genuine wartime machine is criminal.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

lol mine is a very narrow point of view? Since when preservation of original, unique pieces of history is being considered narrow viewed?
I do understand why you want that plane to be up in the sky again, but believe me, it's not feasible and it will never happen.

I suppose you've seen this video before:

but if you haven't check out how hard it is to crank that machine up.

also, have a read at this for further insight in the story and how much work has been put into it (both right and wrong!)
http://www.indianamilitary.org/Freem...90D13/0118.htm



I'm sorry, but you're telling me that the personal mount of Franz Götz, a Luftwaffe ace with 63 victories and a commander, which he flew until the end of the war and that in addition to that is of an extremely rare breed, doesn't qualify to you as important piece of history?

Would you then fly the BMW engined Ju88 at Hendon or the Me410 at Cosford too?



how do you assume that it's not close to the real deal? is it in terms of handling? Sound? manoeuvrability? Or is it just that fetishism you were blaming me of? The funniest thing is that I could take you to a flight line with Allison and Merlin powered P-40s and trust me, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference by just hearing them.
The Jumo engine sounds pretty much like a DB605, with the typical "turbo whine" and a low grumble tone, one wouldn't probably be able to tell the difference between a Ju88 and a Fw190D engine running.
You don't seem to have an understanding of the conception of safety, to you the importance of flying a rare machine just because you want it overcomes anything else. That's not the right mentality my friend

Once again, you find a FW190 frame, or a Stuka, or a Sturmovik one that is incomplete and can come back to the sky? Cool! But flying such a genuine wartime machine is criminal.

Oh Stern, oh stern. Up until this post I took your opinion seriously. Now it degenerated to polemics and your absolute will to force your understanding of the issues onto others. Pity, was really a nice debate.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Oh Stern, oh stern. Up until this post I took your opinion seriously. Now it degenerated to polemics and your absolute will to force your understanding of the issues onto others. Pity, was really a nice debate.

it's a shame man, I was trying to make a point and that's the same one I've been talking about all the way through. I respect you and would care to read your answer to my post if you have the time (or will).

[bongodriver]

I'm really stuck half way on this....

Stern I get what you are saying man.....it's like killing the last Dodo just to see what it tastes like.........but then there is a stuffed Dodo in a museum.....but does the stuffed museum Dodo really convey what a Dodo was? they used to live and breathe, eat and sleep and do all kinds of wonderfull Dodo stuff, which is Bewolfs point, the museum piece is dead and lifeless and really just a mock up of the real thing, a flying example would be a magical thing to see (the aircraft not the Dodo) but it's the last one.....what to do?

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

As long as it just sits around to be stared at, it really does not matter what is under the hood as people won't see it anyways. For a museum a replica does just as fine. Flying comes with a risk, but it is the only way to actually get a real impression of a machine that was made for solely for this, flying. But that is just my opinion.

On the other hand:
A replica would look, feel, and fly the same - only without the risk of breaking apart in midair.
If you want to avoid this risk you'll have to strip it and put it back together - you'll basically end up with a replica. Bad decision.
The best choice therefore would be no to touch the body at all and let it rest in a museum.
Then again, on static display it doesn't need a working engine either - a flying replica would. It would, imho, even turn a kitplane like the Flugwerk into an original.
Why not put a clone in there, in make the engine available for other projects(with better/safer) airframes?

But afaik, there are no other projects which could make use that beast....

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

I'm really stuck half way on this....

Stern I get what you are saying man.....it's like killing the last Dodo just to see what it tastes like.........but then there is a stuffed Dodo in a museum.....but does the stuffed museum Dodo really convey what a Dodo was? they used to live and breathe, eat and sleep and do all kinds of wonderfull Dodo stuff, which is Bewolfs point, the museum piece is dead and lifeless and really just a mock up of the real thing, a flying example would be a magical thing to see (the aircraft not the Dodo) but it's the last one.....what to do?

Well, your comparison doesn't quite work because it's a living thing which is gonna die at some point anyway, but if it didn't, just clone it, like you can clone a genuine plane and make a fully working replica.

As you know yourself, flying warbirds of today are mostly "replicas" anyway, most of the original components are refurbished/changed/removed for the sake of safety. Why doing that to an original when you can have a replica of it and not be too worried if it gets damaged or lost?

[bongodriver]

it was more an analogy than a comparison Stern.......I'm sure most people got it.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by swiss

On the other hand:
A replica would look, feel, and fly the same - only without the risk of breaking apart in midair.
If you want to avoid this risk you'll have to strip it and put it back together - you'll basically end up with a replica. Bad decision.
The best choice therefore would be no to touch the body at all and let it rest in a museum.
Then again, on static display it doesn't need a working engine either - a flying replica would. It would, imho, even turn a kitplane like the Flugwerk into an original.
Why not put a clone in there, in make the engine available for other projects(with better/safer) airframes?

But afaik, there are no other projects which could make use that beast....

Fair point. Mind you though, a Jumo or DB engine are very complex and made of rare components, in addition to that they have an extremely low TBO (last time I talked to a German guy working on a DB605, he mentioned something as shocking as a 50 hours TBO!), so maintenance wise you would need a plethora of spares, either originals or custom made, with prices skyrocketing and infinite ballaches for certification.

The stuff the guys at thevintageaviator.nz do is inspiring to say the least, but they work on extremely simpler engines.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

it was more an analogy than a comparison Stern.......I'm sure most people got it.

yeah man, I know, and I suppose my idea of cloning it still stands, doesn't it?

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

yeah man, I know, and I suppose my idea of cloning it still stands, doesn't it?

even if it's a clone the Dodo is a real Dodo....just not the same Dodo.