PaperModelers.com

Go Back   PaperModelers.com > Papermodelers' Bar and Grill > The CardBoard Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 06-14-2011, 02:03 PM
Lex's Avatar
Lex Lex is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, Britannia
Posts: 1,691
Total Downloaded: 70.75 MB
Send a message via MSN to Lex
Sad to see. I wonder, if someone was able to rebuild an Me262 and make it fly, wouldn't that be an even easier job to simply build one of these American planes and fly them around, and make the real ones sit in museums in flying condition?
__________________
"The world is big"
On hold: Fuyuzuki, Zao, Zara, Akizuki,
Past works: XP55 Ascender, CA Ibuki, Seafang F32, IS-3, Spitfire V, J-20
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-14-2011, 02:10 PM
Swampfox's Avatar
Swampfox Swampfox is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Central Colorado
Posts: 1,710
Total Downloaded: 29.49 MB
Me 262 PROJECT LATEST UPDATES

The above link will bring you up to date on the Me-262 project.

Enjoy,
Swampfox
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-14-2011, 02:46 PM
Zathros Zathros is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,159
Total Downloaded: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanShort View Post
The fire was in the left wing, behind engine #2. Yes it flew fine but it was only a matter of time before something blew, and they made the right call to get it on the ground ASAP. If the fields had not been muddy, the fire crews might have been able to get to it in time. As it was, most of the fire trucks could not traverse the field from what we're hearing. Check this link for some of the most pertinent photos: Images: World War II B-17 crash in Oswego - DailyHerald.com

Ryan
Amazing how they put out a story without all the facts. I read a story, went back to it, and it had been updated with the "2nd engine on fire" correction. I bet some pilots flying over Germany in WW2 would have shut off that fire, by cutting fuel to that engine or some other procedure. On Take off though, not really too much you can do, going back was the smartest thing to do.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-14-2011, 02:55 PM
Stev0 Stev0 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,726
Total Downloaded: 0
I think we are overlooking the fact that the plane is no more. Crashed and burned, Landed and burned, Teleported and burned.

All results are the plane is gone. =(
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-14-2011, 03:02 PM
billy.leliveld's Avatar
billy.leliveld billy.leliveld is offline
POTW Editor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Rotterdam, Holland
Posts: 3,246
Total Downloaded: 76.82 MB
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lex View Post
Sad to see. I wonder, if someone was able to rebuild an Me262 and make it fly, wouldn't that be an even easier job to simply build one of these American planes and fly them around, and make the real ones sit in museums in flying condition?
I had the same thought, of course it isn't easy to build a replica of such a complex aircraft, but there are only 11 left, and applying Murphies law , there won't be one left in a couple of decades if you keep'm flying just for fun...and who's fun is that? The owner, the lucky pilot?
Last year here in Holland a Dakota was destroyed, because they wanted it to use it for a musical as a background, somebody forgot the measure it, and it didn't fit under a pass-over during transport, that is so stupid, we should take more care about this kind of heritage..
BTW, it was on the morning news here in holland
__________________
Cheers, Billy
http://pinterest.com/billyleliveld/
Reply With Quote
Google Adsense
  #26  
Old 06-15-2011, 02:04 AM
dto dto is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 329
Total Downloaded: 101.41 MB
Sadly, keeping historic aircraft "safe on the ground" doesn't guarantee survival. Aircraft collections are still vulnerable to natural disasters, intentional destruction, and neglect. Some museum exhibits have been damaged or destroyed by tornados and hurricanes, others simply discarded when the current curators decide they simply "don't fit" with the rest of the collection. Even the Smithsonian Institution once chopped up an intact Mitsubishi G4M3 Model 34 "Betty" (keeping only the forward fuselage), because they didn't have enough storage space at the time!

And the devastating 1978 arson fire that destroyed the San Diego Aerospace Museum and many irreplaceable artifacts poses a question -- is it any safer to concentrate so many rare aircraft under one roof while limiting potential visitors due to geographic proximity, or should some continue to barnstorm the country where they can be appreciated by a much larger audience?

Mind you, I cringe when the Northrop N9MB Flying Wing flies, since it's a priceless one-of-a-kind aircraft. But on the other hand, it's only in the air when you truly appreciate the Wing's significance and beauty. Watching that boomerang-shaped plane virtually disappear when "edge-on" is an unforgettable lesson in how "visually stealthy" that classic design remains.

So should we fly replicas instead? I'd venture to say that most airshow fans would prefer the real thing. But remember that spare parts are dwindling, and engines can't run forever. Imagine assembling brand new "zero-time" Merlin engines to keep those P-51 Mustangs flying into the late 21st Century. Even if you still have the fabricating equipment and the expertise, such a production line would be financially impossible. So eventually most of the remaining WWII warbirds will be permanently grounded, or severely restricted to short "hops".

In a sense, we've already seen this happening with the WWI generation of aircraft. Only a few genuine veterans still fly on a limited basis. Most "dogfighters" on the air show circuit are replicas, including all the "Fokker Triplanes". And the vast majority of replica planes aren't equipped with authentic rotary engines, either. But the audience still loves them.

As for WWII replicas, consider the Tora! Tora! Tora! T-6 Texans, and the Spanish-built Me-109s and He-111s. So it may be a matter of time before replicas of more warbirds enter the show circuit -- considering the relative scarcity of flightworthy examples, I wouldn't be surprised if Spitfires and Hurricanes are cloned sometime during the next decade. (And I hear that the much-maligned Brewster Buffalo was actually a pleasant flyer when not loaded down with guns, ammo and armor -- fancy seeing a flying replica in pre-war colors.) Larger multi-engined bombers probably are less likely, due to their increased complexity and expenses.

The biggest obstacles would be cost, regulatory approval and insurance. A solitary enthusiast building his dream project in his garage might gain an "experimental" registration with comparatively little hassle, but starting a production line of "Neo-Luftwaffe" Stukas could be another matter. And you probably have to pre-sell a good number of replicas before production can commence, meaning that someone has to pay for the preliminary design work and prototype construction. Unfortunately we can't rely on Hollywood anymore -- instead of commissioning squadrons of replica Japanese aircraft for Tora! Tora! Tora! , today's moviemakers simply use computer-generated warbirds. So I assume that future replica aircraft will mostly come from privately-run limited production projects, similar to those new Me-262s. But consider that Stormbird project officially began in 1993, with several production difficulties over the course of a decade before the first plane even got off the ground.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-15-2011, 06:03 AM
Zathros Zathros is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,159
Total Downloaded: 0
I'd like to see a big "Burt Rutan designed carbon fiber version of a B-17. You could make it look authentic enough, take people for rides. It could easily be certified. Modern engines with fake "Radial" outsides, heck, we could sell it to other countries. Modern WW2 Era Bombers! It would actually be a useful craft, running mercy missions, etc . Essentially, a flying big plastic model of it. It would probably be cheaper than restoring an original. Sikorsky spent a lot of time restoring the "Excambian", it could fly tomorrow, but it never will, too valuable. The only one of it's kind!!

Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-15-2011, 06:14 AM
peter taft's Avatar
peter taft peter taft is offline
Forum Helper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Nottinghamshire
Posts: 6,429
Total Downloaded: 168.03 MB
Nothing is safe like has been said here already, BUT... the chances of a lost plane due to NATURAL disasters is far less than if you actually keep flying them. These planes - now lost {thankfully without loss of life } cannot be replaced, yeah replicas could be made, but if the preservation societies are struggling to keep these ones running, a build up of a NEW replica would have an even bigger price tag. Keep 'em on the ground, covered up...and loved by all !
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-15-2011, 08:23 AM
John Dell's Avatar
John Dell John Dell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 565
Total Downloaded: 4.31 MB
There is a group who is exploring the possibility of building a replica of a B-17C. For more on this and excellent information on all the surviving B-17s I high recommend this website.

http://www.aerovintage.com/

There is a section of the forum dedicated to the B-17C project.

With all the excellent replica Me 262s and Fw 190s flying, I’d really love to see someone build replica Ju 87s.
__________________
If man could be crossed with the cat it would improve man, but it would deteriorate the cat.
- Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-15-2011, 12:36 PM
ARMORMAN's Avatar
ARMORMAN ARMORMAN is offline
Absolute Final Dimensional Contortionist Judicator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,565
Total Downloaded: 398.11 MB
Let's get the story straight:


Home | Liberty Belle B-17 Flying Fortress
Reply With Quote
Google Adsense
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Parts of this site powered by vBulletin Mods & Addons from DragonByte Technologies Ltd. (Details)
Copyright © 2007-2023, PaperModelers.com