Existing original ww1 Aircraft

How many original WW1 aircraft are still in existence. Is there a list of them on the www anywhere?

[Barrett]

At risk of sounding lawyerly--let alone klintonesque--but what's the meaning of "original"? There are lots of Great War aeroplanes today that are identified as original but if you look closely you'll find almost none retain 100% of their original parts. I'd hazard a guess that many to most are perhaps 1/3 original, so a definition of terms is required. It's to be expected, especially considering the effects of age and neglect. Almost none have their original fabric, so purists may argue the point endlessly.
Ray Brooks' SPAD (and Billy Mitchell's, come to think of it), an Alb. D.5 and Fokker D.7 are displayed at NASM in DC.
The Champlin Fighter Museum in AZ has three originals: Pfalz D.12, Aviatik D.1, and N.28. The Pfalz, ferinstance, has been restored 3 times over the years.
Am uncertain which USAF Museum birds are originals but certainly the Caproni bomber is.

You make a fair and vaild point about definition of terms. Anyone like to hazard an attempt at a workable definition?

[Volker_Nemsch]

The only original WW1 2-seater still flying regulary is (as far as I know) the L.V.G. C.VI of the Shuttleworth Trust some miles north of London.

In France there is one of the Spads existing, flown by Guynemer.

Maybe these two are very close (90%+) to totally original.

Original in my opinion is, when an WW1 pilot would have been almost unable to find out which parts are modern.


Maybe someone else has a better definition ...

[stephen]

I ran into the same thing doing an article a few years ago on "original" WWI airplanes at the USAF Musuem.

I would ask "Is this plane original?"

"Sure."

"Wow. This fabric must be old."

"Oh, well, we replaced that."

"And look at the machine guns! 85 years old!"

"Well, we replaced them too. And the ailerons, and the wires, and the longerons, and the instruments, and the instrument panel, and the windscreen and the cockpit controls."

"But everything else is original?"

"Absolutely."

[Breguet]

This is my great-great-great-great grandfather's axe. Mind you it has had 8 new handles and 4 new heads !

The Albatross DVa in the Aust War Memorial in Canberra is more original than the Smithsonian one. The Pfalz DXII to is pretty well original, also the Deperdussan trainer, plus the Avro 504 that was part of the Imperial gift (mind you Quantas has since put a Dyak engine in it). That's a few of the top of my head. Oh, in Adelaide (South Australia) there is a Bristol M1 that is pretty good and is being restored to having a rotary radial (out of the 504 I believe) after being modified for racing with some sort of in-line motor.

[gregoire]

Guynemer plane at le Bourget is original, the fabric is the one from the time (a couple of piece have been replaced but not that much) the wire are original and so on
Memorial fly spad XIII is said to be original and it is true that most of its part are from WW1 but it also true that a lot of work have been done on that plane

[Lufbery]

How about a looser definition: planes that were originally built during WWI. How many of those are still around in one form or another? In other words, can we distinguish between restorations and reproductions?

One further question: people talk about a plane being 80% original (for example). What does that mean? Does it mean that 80% of the part on the plane are original? What counts as a part? For example, does one count all of the covering of the plane as one part, or as separate parts for each component (fuselage, wings, etc.)?

Regards,

[wulffo]

normaly an existing airframe with a proper frame number would be considered to be the original plane (makes life difficult for fokker enthusiasts as there is a lag of data tags with numbers painted on the fabric). engines and all other bits and bobs were interchangable which was frequently done (there are stories of rewards to the infantry for the supply of allied rotaries to be used in german triplanes during the war which would make them 'not original' at the time ).

many modern day restauration attemts circle around an original engine with original instruments and are principally new planes using old parts. i would stick with the airframes that have a known and continous history.

as for the percentage originality that should not be taken for a scientific number but rather a very coarse indication indicating the precision of the restauration.

[Cigogne]

I think that there is a distinction as to "faithfully restored" which are indeed accurate and "replica" where many deviations are taken from the "original" ie. engine type, rib section, structural details, scale, etc.

To say a restored aircraft is "less than original" because some rotten wood was replaced (necessarily), or that the fabric was replaced by the same type, but of new manufacture, defeats the purpose. If it was done according to specification, then, to me it is still worthy of being thought of as an the real thing. Guynemer's SPAD S.VII had much wood repair and cleaning done to it as did Baracca's. This is necessary as bugs, moisture, etc. attack the airframe. Hats off to those who really know their craft when it comes to aircraft restoration!

To answer the original question about how many WWI aircraft, that were built in WWI exist still... there are a few hundred. At least one book was published about this topic, namely "WWI Survivors" by Ray Rimell. After it came out there were comments that the count in there was less than the actual amount. More are being discovered as time goes on. The amount of preservation depends on the pockets and resources of the owner or organization entrusted to care for the airframe.

Cigogne