The 2004 thread - MB-5 replica

Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

Here's something i thought you might find interesting, a link to a story ond photo of the MB-5 replica bei8ng built in the U.S. www.landings.com/evird.acgi$pass*68258679!_h-www.landings.com/_landings…
Original post
Profile picture for user Papa Lima

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 2,929

How can it be a "replica" if it has different wings? Package received, Mike, thank you.

Member for

16 years 1 month

Posts: 97

You need to see it up close!!!!!
Attachment Size
mb5.JPG 93.46 KB
Profile picture for user Nermal

Member for

16 years 1 month

Posts: 1,464

Its a characature. - Nermal
Profile picture for user Papa Lima

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 2,929

Or even a caricature . . .
Profile picture for user Papa Lima

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 2,929

Martin-Baker M.B.5 Here is the real thing, lousy photo scanned from Jane's AWA WW2
Profile picture for user Stieglitz

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 2,248

If I look at these pics, I must admit that it's ugly. And it does give a buget replica feeling. I think you made a good point there Robbo. J.V.
Profile picture for user Hatton

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 1,343

Aslong as the builder of this lookalike is happy then I guess thats the main thing. Personally I can't see the point in spending so much money and time on an end product that fails to look like the original on so many counts.
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

Aslong as the builder of this lookalike is happy then I guess thats the main thing..
Using my usual "the glass is half full..." standard, lets look at it like this: It's the best looking MB-5 around. Rather than make critical comments (and I agree the plane isn't that pretty, but in my opinion neither was the MB-5, it looks rather like a P-51H with a Griffon). Here's a guy working for years to recreate in some form an extinct English plane. And instead of knocking it, our comments (publicly at least) should be a bit kinder. After all he's been spending his time and his money to build a plane the rest of us can look at. If it weren't for guys like him, the historic aviation hobby would consist of going to static museums, looking through musty copies of Janes and building Airfix kits.
Profile picture for user DazDaMan

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 18,278

It really isn't very pretty is it? It looks like one of Daz's titchy spitfire replica's to me.
¡Hey! ¡Volví a enviar eso!
Profile picture for user Nermal

Member for

16 years 1 month

Posts: 1,464

Ok, it looks vaguely like an MB-5 (if you have an idea of what the MB-5 looked like, and squint a bit) (although it does look a bit like a Mustang too. Ish.). Hurray? - Nermal
Profile picture for user Hatton

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 1,343

QUOTE=J Boyle][SIZE=3] If it weren't for guys like him, the historic aviation hobby would consist of going to static museums, looking through musty copies of Janes and building Airfix kits.[/QUOTE] As opposed to taking valuable historic aircraft parts and then altering them to look like an Historic aircraft. Thats not Historic Aviation. He's building a racing plane that bares a passing resemblance to an MB5. Im sure in one interview the man behind it said that the dimensions of the aircraft had to be altered so that it would fit in his hanger! Interesting approach. The way I look at it is that he's enjoying himself making the aircraft and will undoubtedly have much fun flying it, best of luck to him but I still think it's a pointless exercise. Didnt he sell his p51 to fund this?
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

[/QUOTE] As opposed to taking valuable historic aircraft parts and then altering them to look like an Historic aircraft. Thats not Historic Aviation. He's building a racing plane that bares a passing resemblance to an MB5. [/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure the Mustang wings were new build, and the Griffon was just stiiing around, (it's not like it's desperately needed elsewhere), so no real harm done regarding the historic parts used. All I'm saying is let's give the guy a bit of credit, after all it's better than any plane most of us have ever built.
Profile picture for user dhfan

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 2,655

If I were a Director of Martin Baker, I would be instructing my lawyers to make very, very sure that the name 'Martin Baker' is never used in any way, shape or form in connection with this contraption.
Quite the opposite, there's a link to it on the Martin Baker website.
Profile picture for user Corsair166b

Member for

15 years 11 months

Posts: 1,279

Hmmm...that shot of the MB 5 at the top of this thread features Jack Cronyn's 'Navy/Denver' T-6 in the background....flew a photo mission with it last month...and then we have some Key Publishing employess with it as OSH 2003 as illustrated here... Mark
Profile picture for user Flood

Member for

16 years 4 months

Posts: 7,755

Using my usual "the glass is half full..." standard, lets look at it like this: It's the best looking MB-5 around. Rather than make critical comments (and I agree the plane isn't that pretty, but in my opinion neither was the MB-5, it looks rather like a P-51H with a Griffon). Here's a guy working for years to recreate in some form an extinct English plane. And instead of knocking it, our comments (publicly at least) should be a bit kinder. After all he's been spending his time and his money to build a plane the rest of us can look at. If it weren't for guys like him, the historic aviation hobby would consist of going to static museums, looking through musty copies of Janes and building Airfix kits.
Knocking it? The guy has spent an awful lot of money and ended up with...THAT? Sorry - but (if I recall correctly) it has been built to his own specification. Now maybe you like it, but if his specification had required a podded jet engine on each wing, attached to a visibly piscine-like fuselage then what you have is still a Me262 (maybe), not an MB-5... Just because it has paint on it does not mean it is the Mona Lisa...;) Flood
Profile picture for user Corsair166b

Member for

15 years 11 months

Posts: 1,279

I applaud J Boyle's comments and think QUITE a few people on this forum (no names mentioned) spend a GREAT deal of their time bitching about stupid sh*t instead of appreciating what some folks are trying to do out there in the world of warbird aviation....and these god-awful debates over whether a plane is original from parts actually used in it during it's service life or whether the plane was built from the ground up (read OSCARS) with new materials to old specs...let's get over that, huh? They're kinda ridiculous.... Mark

Member for

15 years 3 months

Posts: 50

Here's a side by side comparison from almost the same angle. Even though it's a bit off from the original it's still one heck of an undertaking and I hope it all works out OK.

Member for

16 years 7 months

Posts: 2,246

Havent we done this before?? Its not an MB.5 replica in the strictest sense of the word but its still a pretty impressive undertaking. I dont even think the builder/owner claims its an exact replica. It does look a bit short though. Still better than I could achieve and its been a labour of love for the owner so good on him. An MB.5 it isnt however.
Profile picture for user Mark12

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 10,028

Fixed it ;) :) Mark
Attachment Size
mb5a.JPG 35.55 KB

Member for

16 years 7 months

Posts: 2,246

SNJ behind looks funny though ;)