Your Opinions on Restoration

I recently watched a short video of a restored WW2 fighter bomber. I will leave it unnamed so it doesn't influence your opinions. When I turned it on, I was delighted to see that this aircraft had been restored to full flying condition.

But then, while watching I found out that the engine was not original and it was taken from another WW2 fighter.

Instantly I lost all interest in it. I was quite surprised afterwards thinking back. Since the engine was not original I felt that this was not a restored aircraft. It looked the part but lacked the beating heart of its origins.

Also there is a company in New Zealand that builds WW1 planes from scratch including the engines, would you consider this or does it need to be the original that came of the production lines many years ago.

So I ask you this, how important is the whole package to you in appreciating restored aircraft or cars.

A couple of years ago I went to see my favourite museum and I tell you that I couldn’t take my eyes off the Buccaneer aircraft. That arse of an aircraft used to land on a carrier... So some little materials establish authenticity?

No, no need to chase that I'd say.

I just wanted to add that Tornado is normal in size however the Buccaneer is more massive it's like wow, looking at it

Typically, I'm in it for the machinery, not the material. If it matches the original specs it's as good as the original for me.

All of the above are great for me. Although new-built from scratch is my preferred to see flying as then I dont get the dread and fear of thinking that if there is a mishap it's destroying an irreplaceable bit of history.

All of the above :)

While I like to see the original, sometimes that is just not possible and a scratch built replica to the original specs can give you a feeling for the original.

I know very little about restoration of old warbirds. But one thing is obvious: amount of available spare parts on the market is not big, some of them are unavailable nowadays. And imho this is a big factor during a restoration process, it can force you to make some unwanted compromises... :smilewink:

I don't think it needs an original engine in the sense that a Spit doesn't need an engine from the war. If a engine can be built 100% according to the correct specs, why not?

I don't think it needs an original engine in the sense that a Spit doesn't need an engine from the war. If a engine can be built 100% according to the correct specs, why not?

The realist in me agrees that a rebuild on new-manufactured part to spec is usually going to be the only way you'll ever see that plane fly/ engine run, because all-original parts are often impossible to find... and even if found, probably need cleaning-up that is itself a restoration, because you may need to, for example, weld in rusted-out or stripped threads and cut new ones.

The purist in me feels compelled to point out that new-built parts can be "100% to spec", yet be completely different from the originals, because the originals probably WEREN'T quite "to spec". They were "close enough". Our machining is so much better these days (as is our metallurgy), compared to WW2, that the "same" engine can be made to perform much better. IE, if you produced a Merlin with modern materials and machining, to the blueprint specs of the original, you could probably push 120 inches (or more!) manifold pressure or something ridiculous like that. The parts we make now would just be *too perfect*.

Same is true in automotive engines; the engine that may produce only 150 hp as installed in your everyday car, can, by replacing the individual parts with "blueprinted" ones cut to precisely the spec of the blueprints (within tiny fractions of a millimeter) gain 40, 50, or more horsepower...

So... be careful with what you consider "same as the original". Matching the blueprints doesn't necessarily mean matching the original part.

There's no suitable one-size-fits-all solution. It depends on the airframe and what is feasible.

In the restoration/rebuiliding industry for warbirds it goes like this:

- as long as you have the original data plate / history of the aircraft (traded expensively - not so long ago a Fw190-A8 plate/history was offered to me at EUR 15K), you call it a restoration, as long as you remain reasonably faithful to original dimensions; engine you use what is avaiable; this also if not a single part of the airplane other than the data plate is authentic!

- otherwise, it's a rebuild / replica / scale...

By the way, I rather have engines / aircraft rebuilt and flying than a heap of scrap in museums. Or, even better, both.

MAC

Restore 2 airplanes, shoot one down for the museum and keep other one in working order.

Id rather see it flying than not... By non original engines you mean packard not RR right? Not like someone shoved a pair of oversized vw beetle engines!