4 ms·

Because America isn't just as passionate in restoring P-52 Mustang's.

by nbevans 11y ago

ommunist 11y ago
not really. More because America is rebasing a bunch of Abrams tanks to Latvia and F22s raptors closer to Russian borders.
- ommunist 11y ago
  Downvoted? I expected that. Nobody likes truth. BBC for taxpayers money advertises Christies's auction and raises public awareness in UK military. Two nice rabbits with a single shot. @nbevans. I personally like Spitfire very much. But nothing is published on BBC without dual or triple purpose these days.
TylerE 11y ago
A - It's the P-51 B - There are plenty still flying. There used to be a lot more actually, as they were sold off the public quite cheaply after the war. Many many have been lost to accidents over the years - The P-51 is NOT a forgiving airplane. C - The biggest challenge - Really the ONLY major challenge, airframe/structural work is basically a solved problem - are the engines. The Rolls Royce Merlin engine, used in both the Spitfire and the P-51, was last manufactured in 1950. While there were many built (and thus many to scavenge from), that inventory is only shrinking as engines are replaced or overhauled. Basically the world's entire stock of Merlin parts lives in a group of semi trailers in the California desert (http://www.51-factory.com/merlin_overhaul.html http://www.51-factory.com/merlin_overhaul.html) - when they're gone, they're gone.
- WalterBright 11y ago
  I find it hard to believe that there are Merlin engine parts that cannot be made from scratch. Even engine blocks - if the drag racing industry can make custom engine blocks from scratch, why can't a V12 be made?
  - Someone 11y ago
    Every part _can_ be made, and eventually, likely, every part will be made in order to keep these things operational, but enthusiasts find these machines more authentic if they are made from authentic parts. If one starts building new parts from scratch there may come a moment where people say something has become a replica, more so if one also uses new technology (philosophers discuss this as https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus). The weird thing, though, is that the road along which one gets to an object is more important than the end result in determining authenticity. Replace all parts of a spitfire until just one piece remains original, and you have an original spitfire. Build a replica, buy that one original part, and include it, and you still have a replica. A nice example is HMS Victory, a wooden warship that saw battle at Trafalgar. It is kept afloat by replacing its parts. By now around 20% of the original wood remains (http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/05/world/europe/hms-victory/ http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/05/world/europe/hms-victory/). Yet, we think of it as the original ship. However, it is not a given that replacing all parts makes a new object. The Ise grand shrine in Japan is over 2000 years old, but gets rebuilt with new materials every 20 years (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ise_Grand_Shrine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ise_Grand_Shrine)
    - perfTerm 11y ago
      As an analogy, due to cell replication and replacement I'm probably 0% my original "self" but I'm obviously the original me. If you cloned me, and gave my clone my arm, that'd obviously be the replica anyways. So it seems to make sense to me.
    - WalterBright 11y ago
      I understand the desire for "authentic" parts, but one is chasing rainbows. I recall once a business was selling "authentic" 1960s air in a can one could use to fill the tires on one's authentic 1960s muscle car. My personal opinion is that wrecks dredged up from swamps and such should be put into museums as is. Flying airplanes should be replicas, made as close to the original specifications as the owner wants. For example, a few years ago there was a project at Paine Field to build flying replicas of the Me262. They took apart an original to measure everything and make a specification. As a concession to safety, they used modern jet engines and instrumentation, and used lead weights instead of guns (to maintain proper balance). I would have bought one if I could afford one! Nobody would actually want to fly an original, because the engines only lasted about 20 hours, were extremely unreliable, and nobody bothered with corrosion protection (didn't expect the machine to last long enough to corrode).
- nbevans 11y ago
  How does this reply relate to my post? Other than for the typo correction.
- cafard 11y ago
  There was at least one in the VE-Day flyover of Washington.

Because America isn't just as passionate in restoring P-52 Mustang's.

by nbevans 11y ago

Because America isn't just as passionate in restoring P-52 Mustang's.

not really. More because America is rebasing a bunch of Abrams tanks to Latvia and F22s raptors closer to Russian borders.

ommunist 11y ago
Downvoted? I expected that. Nobody likes truth. BBC for taxpayers money advertises Christies's auction and raises public awareness in UK military. Two nice rabbits with a single shot. @nbevans. I personally like Spitfire very much. But nothing is published on BBC without dual or triple purpose these days.

TylerE 11y ago

A - It's the P-51 B - There are plenty still flying. There used to be a lot more actually, as they were sold off the public quite cheaply after the war. Many many have been lost to accidents over the years - The P-51 is NOT a forgiving airplane. C - The biggest challenge - Really the ONLY major challenge, airframe/structural work is basically a solved problem - are the engines. The Rolls Royce Merlin engine, used in both the Spitfire and the P-51, was last manufactured in 1950. While there were many built (and thus many to scavenge from), that inventory is only shrinking as engines are replaced or overhauled. Basically the world's entire stock of Merlin parts lives in a group of semi trailers in the California desert (http://www.51-factory.com/merlin_overhaul.html http://www.51-factory.com/merlin_overhaul.html) - when they're gone, they're gone.

WalterBright 11y ago
I find it hard to believe that there are Merlin engine parts that cannot be made from scratch. Even engine blocks - if the drag racing industry can make custom engine blocks from scratch, why can't a V12 be made?
- Someone 11y ago
  Every part _can_ be made, and eventually, likely, every part will be made in order to keep these things operational, but enthusiasts find these machines more authentic if they are made from authentic parts. If one starts building new parts from scratch there may come a moment where people say something has become a replica, more so if one also uses new technology (philosophers discuss this as https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus). The weird thing, though, is that the road along which one gets to an object is more important than the end result in determining authenticity. Replace all parts of a spitfire until just one piece remains original, and you have an original spitfire. Build a replica, buy that one original part, and include it, and you still have a replica. A nice example is HMS Victory, a wooden warship that saw battle at Trafalgar. It is kept afloat by replacing its parts. By now around 20% of the original wood remains (http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/05/world/europe/hms-victory/ http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/05/world/europe/hms-victory/). Yet, we think of it as the original ship. However, it is not a given that replacing all parts makes a new object. The Ise grand shrine in Japan is over 2000 years old, but gets rebuilt with new materials every 20 years (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ise_Grand_Shrine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ise_Grand_Shrine)
  - perfTerm 11y ago
    As an analogy, due to cell replication and replacement I'm probably 0% my original "self" but I'm obviously the original me. If you cloned me, and gave my clone my arm, that'd obviously be the replica anyways. So it seems to make sense to me.
  - WalterBright 11y ago
    I understand the desire for "authentic" parts, but one is chasing rainbows. I recall once a business was selling "authentic" 1960s air in a can one could use to fill the tires on one's authentic 1960s muscle car. My personal opinion is that wrecks dredged up from swamps and such should be put into museums as is. Flying airplanes should be replicas, made as close to the original specifications as the owner wants. For example, a few years ago there was a project at Paine Field to build flying replicas of the Me262. They took apart an original to measure everything and make a specification. As a concession to safety, they used modern jet engines and instrumentation, and used lead weights instead of guns (to maintain proper balance). I would have bought one if I could afford one! Nobody would actually want to fly an original, because the engines only lasted about 20 hours, were extremely unreliable, and nobody bothered with corrosion protection (didn't expect the machine to last long enough to corrode).
nbevans 11y ago
How does this reply relate to my post? Other than for the typo correction.
cafard 11y ago
There was at least one in the VE-Day flyover of Washington.