The Aerodrome Forum - View Single Post

Langdon · 13 June 2006, 01:05 AM

Langdon,

Your metaphor of getting four or five speeding tickets in one month all in the same car doesn't mean that is the only car you have been driving that month is well taken. I have to believe MvR had more than one plane at his disposal.

Playing the "devil's advocate, you mentioned the evidenced upper wing damage to 425/17. From what you have seen of the surviving wing pieces is it possible that the fabric was removed from that wing panel and recovered in white fabric from a field repair and then had the red paint and had the cross reapplied? Since you see different versions of the cross, this would mean the repair would have had to occurred early in the life of the aircraft. May this also be an explanation for why this aircraft was "out of the loop" with active service as it may have had other damage that took some time to repair.

Hello Dave,

Thanks for being the voice of reason.

I do not know how much fabric was disturbed when the top right wing tip was repaired, all I know is that one rib had suffered damage that had to be repaired and bandaged with fabric (the cross field fabric remained undamaged as far as I can tell as it retains its original crosses under the modifications). There is no way that this damage can be dated and it is possible that it occurred prior to or during its delivery (I am stating this as I do not wish my comments to be misleading, if we have the available facts then each can draw their own conclusion).

Certainly any damage requiring repair will remove an aircraft from service. I would not expect this particular bit of damage to have kept the aircraft from service for long but we do not know if it was more extensive.

I believe there is strong evidence that the rudder was either replaced or re-covered. As I stated elsewhere the national markings would obviously have been the same over the entire aircraft (the later markings weren't but this is because they had not been fully completed, this aircraft is early enough that this would not have been a problem with its first modifications). This aircraft being an earlier build is more likely to have the incorrect narrow bordered rudder cross than 477/17.

I have not seen the existing rudder fabric that is held by the RCMI, does anyone have a photo of it they might share? It would be interesting to see if it has the original Iron cross under the modified one. If 425/17s rudder had never been over-painted in the cross field area then we would expect to see the works number applied to either, or at least one, side and if it was never over-painted then surely this identifying stencil would have been taken as a souvenir along with the remainder of the fabric. clearly this was not the case (also CWATSON please note the reverse side of the fabric does not show red paint as can be seen on the stabiliser).

It is impossible to say how 425 and 477/17 would have differed. If Dan-San is correct in his assumption concerning the LeChelle photos then the two aircraft would most probably have looked the same, If Alex Imrie is correct then 477/17 would have had a red top on its upper wing along with its inter-plane and centre-section struts, engine cowling and wheel covers, if anyone (Taz?) has a hi-res copy of photo #95 in Imrie's book it would be good if you could check the werks number under the top wing to see its clarity.

13 June 2006, 01:05 AM	#61 (permalink)
Langdon Forum Ace Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 753	Langdon, Your metaphor of getting four or five speeding tickets in one month all in the same car doesn't mean that is the only car you have been driving that month is well taken. I have to believe MvR had more than one plane at his disposal. Playing the "devil's advocate, you mentioned the evidenced upper wing damage to 425/17. From what you have seen of the surviving wing pieces is it possible that the fabric was removed from that wing panel and recovered in white fabric from a field repair and then had the red paint and had the cross reapplied? Since you see different versions of the cross, this would mean the repair would have had to occurred early in the life of the aircraft. May this also be an explanation for why this aircraft was "out of the loop" with active service as it may have had other damage that took some time to repair. Hello Dave, Thanks for being the voice of reason. I do not know how much fabric was disturbed when the top right wing tip was repaired, all I know is that one rib had suffered damage that had to be repaired and bandaged with fabric (the cross field fabric remained undamaged as far as I can tell as it retains its original crosses under the modifications). There is no way that this damage can be dated and it is possible that it occurred prior to or during its delivery (I am stating this as I do not wish my comments to be misleading, if we have the available facts then each can draw their own conclusion). Certainly any damage requiring repair will remove an aircraft from service. I would not expect this particular bit of damage to have kept the aircraft from service for long but we do not know if it was more extensive. I believe there is strong evidence that the rudder was either replaced or re-covered. As I stated elsewhere the national markings would obviously have been the same over the entire aircraft (the later markings weren't but this is because they had not been fully completed, this aircraft is early enough that this would not have been a problem with its first modifications). This aircraft being an earlier build is more likely to have the incorrect narrow bordered rudder cross than 477/17. I have not seen the existing rudder fabric that is held by the RCMI, does anyone have a photo of it they might share? It would be interesting to see if it has the original Iron cross under the modified one. If 425/17s rudder had never been over-painted in the cross field area then we would expect to see the works number applied to either, or at least one, side and if it was never over-painted then surely this identifying stencil would have been taken as a souvenir along with the remainder of the fabric. clearly this was not the case (also CWATSON please note the reverse side of the fabric does not show red paint as can be seen on the stabiliser). It is impossible to say how 425 and 477/17 would have differed. If Dan-San is correct in his assumption concerning the LeChelle photos then the two aircraft would most probably have looked the same, If Alex Imrie is correct then 477/17 would have had a red top on its upper wing along with its inter-plane and centre-section struts, engine cowling and wheel covers, if anyone (Taz?) has a hi-res copy of photo #95 in Imrie's book it would be good if you could check the werks number under the top wing to see its clarity.