Pssst! Wanna buy a Mosquito bomber?
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
I was watching an episode of Warbird Restoration covering the one-off two seat Hurricane and they had to get a number of the modifications cleared before flight.
That's because for the small number done in wartime, it was as a RAF field modification, not a Hawker factory one, so it had to be design certified for CAA approval.Dr Jekyll said:
Just how different would restoring/recreating a Hornet be for an outfit used to doing Mosquitos? I used to think the Hornet was essentially a slightly scaled down Mosquito but now I'm told there were a lot of differences.
My money is on: you won’t know until you come across the hurdles. It’s like asking how long a car restoration is going to take. Nobody can ever know, even once they have done a few it’ll be an educated guess with some latitude built in. Dr Jekyll said:
Just how different would restoring/recreating a Hornet be for an outfit used to doing Mosquitos? I used to think the Hornet was essentially a slightly scaled down Mosquito but now I'm told there were a lot of differences.
The big issue, is while the technique's gained from doing the Mossie will be enormously helpful, the fact there are no fuselage moulds in existence for the Hornet is going to be the biggest hurdle to overcome, plus not having any extant example to even look at and study.The late Glyn Powell spent many, many years researching and recreating the moulds needed to form the fuselage for the Mosquito, so this will need to be done from scratch for the Hornet, but with no references available, and with this being a one off (not subsequent Hornets to be done unlike the Mossie) it is a massive undertaking.
aeropilot said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Just how different would restoring/recreating a Hornet be for an outfit used to doing Mosquitos? I used to think the Hornet was essentially a slightly scaled down Mosquito but now I'm told there were a lot of differences.
The big issue, is while the technique's gained from doing the Mossie will be enormously helpful, the fact there are no fuselage moulds in existence for the Hornet is going to be the biggest hurdle to overcome, plus not having any extant example to even look at and study.The late Glyn Powell spent many, many years researching and recreating the moulds needed to form the fuselage for the Mosquito, so this will need to be done from scratch for the Hornet, but with no references available, and with this being a one off (not subsequent Hornets to be done unlike the Mossie) it is a massive undertaking.
lufbramatt said:
aeropilot said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Just how different would restoring/recreating a Hornet be for an outfit used to doing Mosquitos? I used to think the Hornet was essentially a slightly scaled down Mosquito but now I'm told there were a lot of differences.
The big issue, is while the technique's gained from doing the Mossie will be enormously helpful, the fact there are no fuselage moulds in existence for the Hornet is going to be the biggest hurdle to overcome, plus not having any extant example to even look at and study.The late Glyn Powell spent many, many years researching and recreating the moulds needed to form the fuselage for the Mosquito, so this will need to be done from scratch for the Hornet, but with no references available, and with this being a one off (not subsequent Hornets to be done unlike the Mossie) it is a massive undertaking.
Still a huge task to build the moulds though.
The wings you mention are the ones from TT193 that Pioneer have in NZ. They were recovered from Canada where they had been left after TT193 was scrapped in the early 60's after Spartan Air Services retired it. They were heavily damaged though, but there's enough left to build a jig and rebuild them.
aeropilot said:
Avspecs went through all that with the first one they did, Jerry Yagan's KA114, which took 7 years to restore to airworthy.
The next two they did, the ex-IWM T.3 TV959 for Paul Allen, and the FB.6 PZ474 for Rod Lewis, but now owned by Charles Somers both took about 3.5/4 years to do, so 30 months to finish this B.IV is about given the work already done on it for Pathfinder Group before they switched projects.
Paul allen?The next two they did, the ex-IWM T.3 TV959 for Paul Allen, and the FB.6 PZ474 for Rod Lewis, but now owned by Charles Somers both took about 3.5/4 years to do, so 30 months to finish this B.IV is about given the work already done on it for Pathfinder Group before they switched projects.
Never met him, but he has a wonderful business card.
Some Gump said:
aeropilot said:
Avspecs went through all that with the first one they did, Jerry Yagan's KA114, which took 7 years to restore to airworthy.
The next two they did, the ex-IWM T.3 TV959 for Paul Allen, and the FB.6 PZ474 for Rod Lewis, but now owned by Charles Somers both took about 3.5/4 years to do, so 30 months to finish this B.IV is about given the work already done on it for Pathfinder Group before they switched projects.
Paul allen?The next two they did, the ex-IWM T.3 TV959 for Paul Allen, and the FB.6 PZ474 for Rod Lewis, but now owned by Charles Somers both took about 3.5/4 years to do, so 30 months to finish this B.IV is about given the work already done on it for Pathfinder Group before they switched projects.
aeropilot said:
Eric Mc said:
I was watching an episode of Warbird Restoration covering the one-off two seat Hurricane and they had to get a number of the modifications cleared before flight.
That's because for the small number done in wartime, it was as a RAF field modification, not a Hawker factory one, so it had to be design certified for CAA approval.I'd like to see how the airworthy Beaufighter and Typhoon projects get through their CAA scrutineering.
Eric Mc said:
I'd like to see how the airworthy Beaufighter and Typhoon projects get through their CAA scrutineering.
Shouldn't be a problem for the Beaufighter, *IF* the engine/props parts that have been supposedly now found in NZ, are the right parts.......If so, then the Beau won't be "not as per factory build" and therefore shouldn't be any different to any other project.
If TFC do ever finish it as a result, it will only be to sell it straight away as an airworthy example, as it no longer fits TFC's ownership criteria.
How easy it will be to sell is another matter, although you'd think it would easy to sell as an airworthy example than as a project, which they tried to do about 10 years with no success.
As for the Typhoon, I don't believe there's any chance of an airworthy Napier Sabre ever happening.
aeropilot said:
Shouldn't be a problem for the Beaufighter, *IF* the engine/props parts that have been supposedly now found in NZ, are the right parts.......
If so, then the Beau won't be "not as per factory build" and therefore shouldn't be any different to any other project.
If TFC do ever finish it as a result, it will only be to sell it straight away as an airworthy example, as it no longer fits TFC's ownership criteria.
How easy it will be to sell is another matter, although you'd think it would easy to sell as an airworthy example than as a project, which they tried to do about 10 years with no success.
As for the Typhoon, I don't believe there's any chance of an airworthy Napier Sabre ever happening.
Sadly, I believe you are 100% correct regarding the Sabre engine.If so, then the Beau won't be "not as per factory build" and therefore shouldn't be any different to any other project.
If TFC do ever finish it as a result, it will only be to sell it straight away as an airworthy example, as it no longer fits TFC's ownership criteria.
How easy it will be to sell is another matter, although you'd think it would easy to sell as an airworthy example than as a project, which they tried to do about 10 years with no success.
As for the Typhoon, I don't believe there's any chance of an airworthy Napier Sabre ever happening.
Eric Mc said:
aeropilot said:
Shouldn't be a problem for the Beaufighter, *IF* the engine/props parts that have been supposedly now found in NZ, are the right parts.......
If so, then the Beau won't be "not as per factory build" and therefore shouldn't be any different to any other project.
If TFC do ever finish it as a result, it will only be to sell it straight away as an airworthy example, as it no longer fits TFC's ownership criteria.
How easy it will be to sell is another matter, although you'd think it would easy to sell as an airworthy example than as a project, which they tried to do about 10 years with no success.
As for the Typhoon, I don't believe there's any chance of an airworthy Napier Sabre ever happening.
Is the problem with the engine the Typhoon project have, or just the practicalities of making it reliable enough to be airworthy?If so, then the Beau won't be "not as per factory build" and therefore shouldn't be any different to any other project.
If TFC do ever finish it as a result, it will only be to sell it straight away as an airworthy example, as it no longer fits TFC's ownership criteria.
How easy it will be to sell is another matter, although you'd think it would easy to sell as an airworthy example than as a project, which they tried to do about 10 years with no success.
As for the Typhoon, I don't believe there's any chance of an airworthy Napier Sabre ever happening.
I know they weren't too reliable in period.
Sadly, I believe you are 100% correct regarding the Sabre engine.
Dr Jekyll said:
Is the problem with the engine the Typhoon project have, or just the practicalities of making it reliable enough to be airworthy?
I know they weren't too reliable in period.
I really don't know about the state of the engine they have tbh. There are so few complete Sabre left, that is a problem in itself.I know they weren't too reliable in period.
The other issue as you say, is they weren't that reliable in period, and given its now close to 70 years since the last time one flew or was running, there are very people left that worked on them in period, and no certified piston engine aero rebuild facility on the planet that has any experience with them.
A V12 is a V12 and a radial is a radial, but a sleeve valve H24 as complicated as a Sabre is an all together different proposition.
Kermit Weeks has a couple of them for his Tempest V project, and has owned them for 30 odd years, and 25+ years ago he sent one of them to the famous Ricardo company in Shoreham for them to investigate it and check it out.
They had it for a long while, but as far as I know, they ended up returning the engine to Weeks, and there's been no real further update or information on it since. At his age, I can't see Weeks ever finishing that, or many other of his projects.
I just can't see any certified piston aero engine builder taking one on, especially as the number of those doing that sort of work is probably 20% of the number of firms that were in existence 30-40 years ago, if not less than that.
Just to get one running on a static test stand would be an achievement tbh.
swampy442 said:
Surely it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility to re engine a Typhoon its a Griffon/Merlin, or even a Hercules if you were feeling brave.
I know why the Sabre was troublesome, reading about it, oil consumption of 47 to 71 pints AN HOUR
Re engine it and it isn't a Typhoon any more. There's a bit more wiggle room with a Tempest I know why the Sabre was troublesome, reading about it, oil consumption of 47 to 71 pints AN HOUR
Eric Mc said:
The UK Typhoon project has a cutaway training version of the Sabre you can turn over using a hand operated crank. It is fiendishly complicated.
Rolls Royce Heritage have a bare bones Centaurus all beautifully chrome plated showing the sleeve valve operation, its mesmerising to watch and makes you wonder, who the hell thought it would be a good idea lolGassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff