Scudrunners

[url=https://globalnews.ca/news/4765192/hawk ... on-alberta]https://globalnews.ca/news/4765192/hawk ... on-alberta[/url]


[img width=500 height=375]https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress. ... wker-1.jpg[/img]

Seems like such a waste to spend all that time and money to restore an airplane to non-flying condition.

There are two different kinds of aviation museums:  flying
and non-flying.

While I personally love the sight and sound and smell of an
active airplane, I understand the risks associated with operating
such unusual aircraft.  They are fraught with maintenance
problems - they were designed to last six months, not 75 years -
and the number of competent pilots for them is very nearly zero.

Warbirds seats are almost universally not awarded on a merit basis,
with disastrous consequences.  Thick wallet, thin logbook is all too
common in the accident report.

I remember at OSH, all the P-51 owners in their flight suits were
just competent to fly in a circle, following each other around.  There
was one guy who could actually fly the P-51, and he was hated and
envied by the guys in the flight suits, when Bob Hoover complimented
him on his aerobatic flight in the P-51.

Best stay away from that kind of trouble waiting to happen.

I have to say I don't mind if someone refurbishes a plane for static display. It is probably too expensive to do things right.

I won't call it a restoration though.

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=9418.msg26152#msg26152 date=1545380126]
the number of competent pilots for them is very nearly zero.
[/quote]
Last winter I probably got as close to I’ll ever get to being a Hurricane pilot.  A friend had a very long term project which he finally decided had more years to go than he did so he sold it.  All the same, as I got to thinking about what I would have to do to feel minimally competent in the thing and it amounted to something like $4000/month to keep current, unless the Hurri was secretly a giant pussycat.

Now I guess I can go back to pissing away my money on other junk like the rest of the non-Hurricane pilots do.

A friend of mine flies a Hurricane.  His full time job is as a professional
test pilot, something he has done for decades.  He thinks the Hurricane
is a nasty little creature.

Another friend of mine flew the Me109.  In a strong crosswind, on pavement.
He's a superb stick, and he found it challenging.

Another friend of mine - an incredible stick - flew a DH Hornet Moth on
pavement, in a crosswind, with a fully swivelling tailwheel.  I begged him
to install a locking one.

Some lessons here.  These are really, really good pilots, that have been
flying for decades.  They are so far above typical warbird pilots in skill.

These aircraft were NOT intended to be operated off paved runways,
with god help us, a crosswind.  They were designed to be flown off
grass, in a large square field, always taking off and landing into wind.

Given the above, I can respect the decision not to operate these irreplaceable
aircraft, because of the almost certain probability of their eventual loss.

When you consider their ridiculous age, the tricky maintenance - who knows
those systems any more? - and the unusual flight characteristics, they are very
high risk indeed.

I agree with putting them on static display. I do not desire to see them crash or catch fire.

I am just not right in the head, never have been.

I feel like they should not be put back together with string, paper mache, rubber bands and duct tape, instead of proper grade fasteners. When I walk up to what used to be an airplane and it is bent but has really shiny paint, I am usually left sad, not impressed.

Again, I understand that is unreasonable due to the cost.

Visited the place just this past fall. It was going to be sold overseas but there was a public outcry and the City of Calgary purchased it. It is in the hangar at Wetaskawin with the big Sikorsky piston helicopter outside. Mechanic was a friendly guy and it turned out that I had met his dad years back, a Tiger Moth owner.

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=9418.msg26157#msg26157 date=1545453005]
When you consider their ridiculous age, the tricky maintenance - who knows
those systems any more? - and the unusual flight characteristics, they are very
high risk indeed.
[/quote]
Most high risk hobbies also carry the highest rewards and I’ve always figured most risk could be overcome by giving the thing the respect it deserves.  This is true of cool airplanes, motorcycles, guns, chainsaws, alligators, and even mundane-but-dangerous-if-you-think-about-it things like scissors and rubber bands.

[quote]most risk could be overcome by giving the thing the respect it deserves[/quote]

Unfortunately the excessive-money-to-brains-ratio crowd rarely do.

It is a hallmark of the entitled Elite that they treat anything outside
of their vapid, narcissistic bubble with complete contempt.

Look up, oh, I don't know, Piper Malibu crashes.  Or owner-flown
Citation crashes.  I cannot imagine anything more docile than a
Cessna Citation ... those same people try to fly warbirds (shudder).