The People's Mosquito

[avion ancien]

Critiscism without evidence to support it is unacceptable. It does seem that some of the foregoing posts could be said to fall into that category. But surely it is not unacceptable to ask questions designed to ascertain the viability of a project, and those who are behind it, when it has been intimated that donations are to be solicited from the public?

If the project has a sound financial footing, a well thought out business plan and a team capable of achieving their goal, then it and they are to be applauded and encouraged. If there is negativity on the part of some, maybe it is because there have been projects in the past that have not delivered their goals and have not showered glory on their proponents?

I hope that the People's Mosquito project will prove to be financially sound, properly resourced and ultimately successful. However at present, there does not seem to be - at least in the public domain - the information necessary to judge it by reference to those criteria. Hence the questions.

[Bruce]

Absolutely correct - until they have published a plan (and being a crowd funded project, one assumes that they will), there is not much more to be said.

Lets leave personal remarks out of the discussion please - it will get us nowhere.


Bruce

[paulmcmillan]

Just for the record


Mosquito NF.36 RL249 'YP-E' was serving with No. 23 Sqn, stationed at RAF Coltishall, when it crash-landed in to a wood due to engine failure after take-off on 14th February 1949.

The crew consisted of Pilot 1 Richard Colbourne #590994, and Nav 2 William Bert Kirby #1605819

As a result of this incident Pilot 1 Richard Colbourne was awarded the George Medal due to his rescuing the navigator from the burning flame

Sadly Nav 2 William Bert Kirby #1605819 died the next day. See here

http://www.veterans-uk.info/afm2/rol...?SerialNo=R605

The citation for the GM can be read here

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/38666/pages/3459

Richard Colbourne's obit is here

http://mogggy.org/TheGen/viewtopic.p...64c624d2c97bbb

Anyway, if this ever comes off, it will be a fine tribute to a very brave man and a fine rememberance to his colleague


I suspect this would aircraft have been totally destroyed by the post crash fire and explosion, so how much was recovered from the Cottishall dump in 2006?

[Martin Garrett]

Am I correct in thinking that parts from this aircraft were on ebay 12 months or so ago. Some exhaust stubs & a few other bits ? Or is this another Mossie buried at a RAF Station dump that I am thinking about ?

[John Green]

Re 33

Many thanks for that. That is very moving. For me personally, these are the snippets that I most prize.

John Green

[QldSpitty]

Is the Facebook page still going?I haven,t heard of them from a while.

[Dan Johnson]

One of the constants of warbird forums seems to be a core group of folks who on one hand ask for info on new projects and discoveries, and then when that kind of info is posted, they turn around and bash it or find fault.

Let's face it. We're all a bunch of 'dreamers' in many ways, with our fascination being WW2 aviation.

I'd rather support the dreams, then tear them down. If even 1/4th of the 'dreams' come to fruition, it's still more then we had before hand.

I wish them all the luck and success in the world to make this particular "dream' get into the air.

Just like the desert P40, the buried Spits, and any of the other 'dreams" out there.

My only regret is not being in a position to chase one of those dreams myself.

[Moggy C]

One of the constants of warbird forums seems to be a core group of folks who on one hand ask for info on new projects and discoveries, and then when that kind of info is posted, they turn around and bash it or find fault.

I can't offhand recall how long I have been reading this forum, but it's a long time.

This has always happened, and I guess it always will.

Plus ça change ....

As long as it stays civil, but some people appeared seized by evangelical zeal for the rightness of their view, and that's where the problems arise

Moggy

I freely admit to confidently forecasting that we'd never see a Vulcan fly.

[MerlinPete]

Am I correct in thinking that parts from this aircraft were on ebay 12 months or so ago. Some exhaust stubs & a few other bits ? Or is this another Mossie buried at a RAF Station dump that I am thinking about ?

Martin

That`s correct, but the person selling them was just guessing as to the identity of the aircraft, which became apparent when I purchased 24 exhaust stubs from him, all purporting to be from RL249!

Pete

[Bruce]

Yes, they just so happened to come out of the pit at the same time.

One wonders therefore how they can be sure that what they found relates to that aircraft?



Bruce

[sopwith.7f1]

Wasn't there a large number of Mossie parts "mostly exhaust stubs", dug out of an airfield dump in the past couple of years ?, looked like there were enough for several aircraft. It was also believed that more stuff still remaind burried on the site, & a further dig was planned, if the planned dig went ahead, was anything else found, & would any of it be useable in the proposed rebuild ?.

Bob T.

[Bushell]

Plus ça change ....

As long as it stays civil, but some people appeared seized by evangelical zeal for the rightness of their view, and that's where the problems arise

Moggy

Including yourself

[Moggy C]

As I pointed out in the bit you excised from the quote, yes.

Moggy

[cypherus]

From experience particularly with the BGA I have found that the most unlikly people can and often do produce the most amazing reconstructions back to flight from boxes and bags of smashed pieces of airframes that so called experts had written off being not worthy of there attention, and by the way done it myself more than once.

It is not a case of having the technical qualifications that matter to the heart of any restoration it is the will and drive to actually start, run and complete it, expertise, information and materials are available, money can be obtained and often as not over time the product presented for all here to enjoy.

To howl down anyone who attempts a restoration to flight as has been seen in this thead alone is a very negative attitude to take, better to accept that there is a proposal to do this and maybe some here could better make use of there time not in critisim but in assistance and support to such projects.

[David Burke]

I think a sense of reality is also worthwhile . Much as I applaud the concept - to build a Mosquito as your first project is hard enough -to choose a variant which is effectively extinct and to have to pretty much guess a lot of detail will be a challenge.

Then comes the bit where you need to get the CAA on board - a piece of burnt and rotted wood isnt going to cut it as a starting point!

[Oxcart]

I don't think there could've been hardly anything left of the dH 88 Comet 'Black Magic' but that seems to be coming along just fine!

[avion ancien]

There is interesting information to be found at http://peoplesmosquito.wordpress.com/faqs/#F10. I would recommend those with questions about the project to read that. It deals with some of the questions which have occurred to me, the salient points of which are:

- the cost of creating a flying Mosquito is estimated at c. £5,000,000
- the estimated timescale is 3 to 5 years
- public donations are to be solicited, but the means by which this will be done has not yet been decided and the necessary mechanism for so doing has not yet been put in place
- funding also is to be sought by way of, inter alia, corporate donations and sponsorship, grants and branded goods sales
- the project intends to seek charitable status but does not yet have this

[Bruce]

That is a good FAQ, and I am pleased to see it there.

It does serve to answer a number of questions that have been posed, and represents their best guess at the current time, which is fair enough.

For the record, the NF36 basic design is no different to a standard fighter fuselage; the radome fits in place of the gun nose of the earlier model. Thus the process used to build the FB26 in New Zealand would be the same for an NF36.

We can argue all day about the timescale and the cost - but no-one will know until it is well underway. The New Zealand aeroplane has taken 10 years so far, and is well funded, and was complete. The challenge will be to find enough original parts to make the build process viable, and to avoid it being a replica. As I have said before, there is a lot of metal in this wooden aeroplane!

Like Moggy above, I knew the Vulcan would never fly - I wont make such a pronouncement again!


Bruce

[David Burke]

Oxcart -the remains of Black Magic were confined to rear fuselage parts and from memory pilot seat . That was presented to the CAA in 1979 and accepted as a basis for rebuild -unfortunately a fire in the workshop at Chirk
reduced the core material dramatically.

Any comparison with a Mosquito rebuild isnt really valid as its not really in any way similar.

[Oxcart]

Oxcart -the remains of Black Magic were confined to rear fuselage parts and from memory pilot seat . That was presented to the CAA in 1979 and accepted as a basis for rebuild -unfortunately a fire in the workshop at Chirk
reduced the core material dramatically.

Any comparison with a Mosquito rebuild isnt really valid as its not really in any way similar.

In terms of scale, maybe not-but they still started with next to nothing

[QldSpitty]

I can remember being told that by our Museum Manager.And another high profile historic researcher (cough"Mark12" cough) saying you can,t build a spit from the drawings alone.He was right but gave us the impetus to try harder :diablo:

[Nick Horrox]

Hi all,

Nick Horrox here. I am charged with looking after press and public relations for The People's Mosquito. You'll see my name in the list on The People page of our website www.peoplesmosquito.org.uk. I also often answer questions and address comments on the site.

This forum thread was pointed out by one of my colleagues and I though it would be good to come on directly answer some of your questions about the project. We appreciate there are a lot of questions out there and we are trying to answer them all, where and when we can.

For a start I thought it would be good address the points that have so far been made:

#1 - If I may, John, the piece in FlyPast does actually say that we'll be restoring to flight status.

#3 - As #11 suggests, we didn't choose the NF.36, it chose us when we were offered the remains by our donor. The NF.36 might not be the prettiest Mosquito variant, but the restoration will certainly be unique and the night fighter has its own place in aviation history. The NF.36 was the RAF's last prop-driven night fighter before the introduction of the Vampire NF.10 and Meteor NF.11 and thus the Mosquito served from WW2 and into the Cold War.

#4 - Funding is not yet in place - As an aside though, we will be starting fundraising in earnest soon via a third party facility.

#21 - You may sneer, but John Lilley's project management skills are proving invaluable - particularly in these early stages. Every project needs a good manager and John is one. See the last two lines of your quoted text.

#24 - The skills required to undertake such a restoration are specialised and rare, so yes, various elements of the work will be contracted out. Funding will be from corporate sponsorship, public donations and other fund-raising opportunities such as the sale of branded items etc.

#31 - It is perfectly acceptable to ask questions to ascertain the viability of the project. We welcome sincere and honest questions and any opportunity to answer them. I would also say that we welcome sincere and well-meaning criticism too, as we can but learn from it.

#32 - We will be publishing our business plan on the website soon. We see this as vital in helping us garner credibility with the public and other interested parties.

#33 - i) Yes, we are hoping this will be a fitting tribute to many very brave men and a flying memorial to all those who served on Mosquitoes. ii) As stated on our FAQs page, not a great deal of RL249 was recovered - only about 10% of the original aircraft.

#36 - The TPM Facebook Page and TPM Supporters' Group are both alive and kicking. Please take a look: (Page) www.facebook.com/peoplesmosquito, (Supporters' Group) www.facebook.com/groups/181903705240642. You would be doing us a great service if you either "liked" our Page or joined the Supporters' Group - it's proving a great forum for discussing anything Mosquito related (and other aviation matters), sharing interesting stories and we've made some great contacts through it too. It's also one of the first places we share our news.

#44 - You are quite right - at this point in time, it's about having the will to make something happen. As you say: technical expertise, materials and information are available and funds can be obtained.

#45 - i) We definitely have a sense of reality. This is a high-risk project, we don't deny that and to take on something like this without being aware of the dangers and pitfalls would be positively quixotic. ii) The CAA is actually the start of the process - much work has already been done in this area and is moving apace, and; iii) you would be amazed at how much detail is available.

Well I hope that's made a start. Please ask if there's anything else you want to know, and I'll do my best to answer.

Thanks,
Nick Horrox

[Bruce]

Thanks Nick for coming on here, and taking the opportunity to engage on a public forum.

Unlike the last thread, this one has largely stayed civil; please lets keep it that way!



Bruce

[Rocketeer]

Welcome Nick and Thanx for the informative first post. I wish you luck. I love Phoenix rising restorations!

[Nick Horrox]

Thanks Bruce - Civil is my middle name I look forward to some good and worthwhile discussion.

[Nick Horrox]

Thanks Tony. It should be an interesting, if slightly bumpy, ride!

[avion ancien]

It's good to have something 'from the horse's mouth'. It could have been the lack of that which contributed to some of the problems with the last thread. It's easy for speculation and unsubstantiated claims to thrive when a factual lacuna exists. It's less easy when the contrary is true - or, at least, the speculators and makers of unsubstantiated claims find it more difficult to appear credible.

[Hurn]

Thanks for the post Nick. Good to see someone here from the project who can answer questions going forward.

Glad you haven't been put off completely by a certain other 'gutter' website who've been throwing their toys out the pram lately.

All the best.

[Nick Horrox]

Thanks, Hurn. No I wasn't put off...entirely. As I said I look forward to some worthwhile discussion on here.

[shortfinals]

Thanks for laying out TPM's current status, Nick!