It looks like its 99% still intact minus scraping, saved the engines...  is it still a good plane and would the FAA let it fly?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH_AzTvnN_Q

I don't see why not, there has been worse damage to airliners that have gone on to fly again.

New gear, a couple of new props, and some plastic surgery to her nose and i'd imagine she'd be right as rain ;)

You can rebuild anything. The most recent airworthy Spitfire restoration was based on an airframe that had laid under a beach for over 40 years!

In a case like this, I suspect the insurers will have the final say, particularly on older GA airframes as their value generally decreases with age.

Quote:

You can rebuild anything.

Your right there. The Polikarpovs that Sir Tim Wallis restored had been at the bottom of a lake since World War 2.

andy190 wrote on Feb 27^th, 2012 at 6:53pm:

Quote: You can rebuild anything. Your right there. The Polikarpovs that Sir Tim Wallis restored had been at the bottom of a lake since World War 2.

At what point do you go from calling it a restored aircraft to a replica because some aircraft such as those you mentioned only actually have like 5% of the original left in them and to me that doesn't make it a restoration it's a new aircraft with a old part bolted on?

wrote on Feb 27^th, 2012 at 8:00pm:

andy190 wrote on Feb 27th, 2012 at 6:53pm: Quote: You can rebuild anything. Your right there. The Polikarpovs that Sir Tim Wallis restored had been at the bottom of a lake since World War 2. At what point do you go from calling it a restored aircraft to a replica because some aircraft such as those you mentioned only actually have like 5% of the original left in them and to me that doesn't make it a restoration it's a new aircraft with a old part bolted on?

The FAA definition of a restoration, as long as it has the original data plate with serial number, it is an original aircraft.  Often times when groups are looking to find and recover a lost aircraft, they are most worried about finding the original data plate.  Every other part can be brand new, so long as it has an original factory plate.

Well I believe that the I-16's have more than 5% of the original plane in them. I think the fuselages are pretty much original & Sir Tim got the new parts made to the same specs as they were originally made to in the 1930’s & 40’s.

DaveSims wrote on Feb 27^th, 2012 at 8:18pm:

wrote on Feb 27th, 2012 at 8:00pm: andy190 wrote on Feb 27th, 2012 at 6:53pm: Quote: You can rebuild anything. Your right there. The Polikarpovs that Sir Tim Wallis restored had been at the bottom of a lake since World War 2. At what point do you go from calling it a restored aircraft to a replica because some aircraft such as those you mentioned only actually have like 5% of the original left in them and to me that doesn't make it a restoration it's a new aircraft with a old part bolted on? The FAA definition of a restoration, as long as it has the original data plate with serial number, it is an original aircraft.  Often times when groups are looking to find and recover a lost aircraft, they are most worried about finding the original data plate.  Every other part can be brand new, so long as it has an original factory plate.

It is the same with engines. The only true original part of an engine is the serial number plate. To that end, I have an engine installed above my fireplace...... ;D

As to the original question. If the spare parts and a proficient metal mechanic are to hand, this aircraft could be back in the air in a week. I saw nothing in the video that would cause me any great concern.

Matt

Not sure what all the fuss is about. We're not talking about a major restoration here. This sort of thing happens all the time. The only question is whether the insurance company or owner think it's worth repairing.

I thought the pilot did a good job. Note that he tried to line the props up during the approach to avoid damage. Unfortunately not quite successful. As usual the news reporters were trying to make a drama out of a crisis.

wrote on Feb 27^th, 2012 at 8:00pm:

andy190 wrote on Feb 27th, 2012 at 6:53pm: Quote: You can rebuild anything. Your right there. The Polikarpovs that Sir Tim Wallis restored had been at the bottom of a lake since World War 2. At what point do you go from calling it a restored aircraft to a replica because some aircraft such as those you mentioned only actually have like 5% of the original left in them and to me that doesn't make it a restoration it's a new aircraft with a old part bolted on?

Worms. Can of. ;D

Quite a bit of the restored Grumman Wildcat population (and others) spent the best part of half a century at the bottom of Lake Michigan! The Russian examples are "special" in that the preservation conditions are generally remarkable (fresh water, peat bogs, very cold). There was an intact P-39 (IIRC) brought up about 5 years or so ago that had made an emergency landing, and the pilot was still sat in the cockpit after more than 60 years, almost perfectly preserved in the water.

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/p39/index.htm

Re the 310 in the clip: It would have to be gone over pretty thoroughly, just in case (they stopped making these a while back, so it could be a pretty high-time airframe), but I see no reason why it would not be flyable with very little work. Just sparing the props and engines alone makes a world of difference.
I thought he looked a bit nervous there, feeling for the ground too much, but that was nice work, bumping the starters to make sure the props were out of harm's way.

AFAIK they managed to find some factory workers in a retirement home in russia to do those Polikarpovs in full factory finish. The only thing that will be different is that they are most likely powered by a ASh-62 instead of a M-25, as the former is still in production