WIX Archives
Re: good, some comments!
Posted by Paul Coggan on Wed Feb 13, 2002 09:15:15 AM
In reply top Re: No comment? Really? :-) posted by Mick on Wed Feb 13, 2002 07:55:22 AM
: What you trying to say Paul, do I say too much or what ? ;
: -)
:
: I think I've already said enough on the matter, time for o
: thers to speak up.
: Actually I was interested in what you said in AM about the
: re will probably be some kind of classification system wit
: hin five years which most of the owners/restorers will abi
: de by, or words to that effect......whose system will they
: be using, yours ?
:
: TaTa
: Mick
I think lots of constructive comments have been made, on and off this board about the rebuild/restoration/replica argument. For some reason some people don't care, others do, some are passionate others are not. However, there is a general concensus - from the communications I get - and some frustration that some aircraft are put forward to represent what they cannot be historically speaking. Also it is amazing how many 'replicas' suddenly become originals overnight or with a change of owner. I have always applauded all those that contribute towards keeping warbirds airworthy either by restoring original aircraft or manufacturing major structures. We are however seeing problems of identity and I think it is only a matter of time before we see litigation over the ownership of an aircraft identity. We can talk about it forever (and I enjoy healthy debate as much as you do) and those that need to can brush it under the carpet for as long as they like but the real fact is we are seeing identity problems already. A simple set of guidelines would help solve the problem, and in due course stop the lawyers getting richer. And such guidelines would be constructive - people that have far greater knowledge and experience of vintage aircraft and warbirds than I have put up suggested definitions, so no, not necessarily my suggestions would be used to try and define what should be called what. Frankly Mick the whole thing is a mess, and the longer it goes on the bigger the mess will get. Only those with something to hide will try and decry such a system.
Cheers for now
Paul
Follow Ups:
- Well said Paul - Tony Wed Feb 13, 2002 09:33:24 AM
- While we're on the subject, u have seen this PaulC - Tony Wed Feb 13, 2002 10:30:17 AM
- Re: While we're on the subject, u have seen this PaulC - Paul Wed Feb 13, 2002 11:10:35 AM
- Re: While we're on the subject, u have seen this PaulC - Stephen Grey Thu Feb 14, 2002 05:50:34 AM
- Sorry Stephen, your replies missing........:0) N/T - Tony Thu Feb 14, 2002 06:40:19 AM
- Re: While we're on the subject, u have seen this PaulC - Stephen Grey Thu Feb 14, 2002 05:50:34 AM
- Re: While we're on the subject, u have seen this PaulC - Paul Wed Feb 13, 2002 11:10:35 AM
- Spot on!... - Tom Wed Feb 13, 2002 05:22:51 PM
- You mean..... - Mick Wed Feb 13, 2002 06:07:41 PM
- I know what You mean..... - Tom Thu Feb 14, 2002 01:51:55 PM
- You mean..... - Mick Wed Feb 13, 2002 06:07:41 PM
- The word we are looking for is... - Paul McMillan Thu Feb 14, 2002 04:44:47 AM
- While we're on the subject, u have seen this PaulC - Tony Wed Feb 13, 2002 10:30:17 AM
- You're telling me it's a mess !!!! - Mick Wed Feb 13, 2002 06:49:01 PM
- An advance on the dog-tag ID system. - Mick Wed Feb 13, 2002 07:03:14 PM
- I think wearing them around your neck will suffice, but..... - Karen Wed Feb 13, 2002 07:27:13 PM
- Very well said Mick!....n/t - Karen Wed Feb 13, 2002 07:28:51 PM
- An advance on the dog-tag ID system. - Mick Wed Feb 13, 2002 07:03:14 PM