WIX Archives
Classifications
Posted by Rob Mears on Wed Dec 25, 2002 11:39:43 PM
In reply top Re: ME-262 has flown! posted by Bob on Sun Dec 22, 2002 11:14:44 PM
It's alot easier to classify these planes for what they aren't, rather than what they are (speaking of the new-production 262's, FW-190's, Ki-43's, YAK-9UM's, etc). Instead of calling them any particular thing, I now just say they are "not original wartime production". The term "Warbird" started out as a kind of nickname. Scientifically spliting hairs over its exact definition now just strikes me as kind of ironic :)
I guarantee all of you that the first time a Flug Werk FW-190 flies past, I'll be turning to the guy next to me saying "That's one beautiful Butcher Bird!" I won't be putting that magic moment in jeopardy by shuffling 'analitical sensability' to the forefront of my mind :) I say it's fair to consider a Spitfire a "Spitfire" if the company responsible for fabricating it did so by faithfully referencing the original Supermarine blueprints! Of course that plane should in no way be confused with one built in the mid-20th Century during WWII, but it's obviously a Spitfire nonetheless IMO.
Even Flight Magic's US-powered A6M is still an A6M to me. Though not manufactured by Mitsubishi, it's for sure not an AT-6, and it's SURELY no RV-6 :):)