P-51 data plates

[Griffonsrule]

Was screwing around on ebay tonight and came across this!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3077863472&category=4672

Are they hard to come by? Really worth the $15k the guy wants? Seems kinda strange the guy is selling an ex blue angels F/A-18A, a Mig-29, a T-33, a T-28 and a UH1.

[Victor Archer]

Whooo, that person has a lot of very interesting items for sale!

I have herd that if you have the data plate and registration paperwork
you could build an airplane from scratch and it still be registered under that original registration.
You would not have to register the plane as a new scratch build experimental.

[speeddemon]

Yup....just look at N7715C at the Planes of Fame Museum. (I think it's currently done up as Wee Willy II? Wardog, any confirmation?)

7715C was, of course, the Red Baron. But the data plate was recovered from the wreckage, and a "new" stock P-51 was built up 'around' it. John Maloney raced it as #0 at Reno '84.

The data plate and registration number 'say' that the plane is the same as Red Baron. But it's not. It's the original plate and number on a totally different airframe.

Confusing? Hell...just try to figure out if N79111 is REALLY the 'Galloping Ghost' or not. Might be easier playing Three Card Monte with my cousin Julio.....

[Race 29]

Now wait a minute, there's two ways of looking at this. For instance. A few years ago I paid $5000 for the axe that George Washington used to cut down the Cherry tree. The previous owner was kind enough to replace the old blade with a new one, and the old wooden handle with a new yellow plastic Stanley handle. So now, not only do I have a nice historical artifact, but it works pretty efficiantly too!

Race 29

[rpzo]

7715C was, of course, the Red Baron. But the data plate was recovered from the wreckage, and a "new" stock P-51 was built up 'around' it. John Maloney raced it as #0 at Reno '84.

Speeddemon,

Is this the same mustang that your quote refers to? The pic was taken in '85 at Bakersfield and looks to be the same plane that is shown in the '84 Reno program. Any idea where it is now?

Rick

[wardog]

it's based in Chino, CA - and yes, it did use the RB-51 data plates

[rpzo]

It's not Spam Can is it? The reason for my confusion is that I have one reference book that implies that it is Spam Can and other resources show Spam Can being purchased as surplus from McClellan in 1957.

[wardog]

Spam Can is a different plane. Wee Willy II is the plane that has the RB-51 data plate

[rpzo]

Thanks for the clarification

Rick

[Unregistered]

Originally posted by speeddemon

The data plate and registration number 'say' that the plane is the same as Red Baron. But it's not. It's the original plate and number on a totally different airframe.

What I find really interesting is that its just flat-out illegal to do that with the VIN plate on a car, but seemingly fine with airplanes. Odd.

Certain aspects of warbird sales value confuse me too... like the whole TF-51 thing going on. Right now it adds value to convert a P-51 to a TF-51, but turning a LeMans into a GTO clone or a Belvedere into a Roadrunner clone doesn't make either car worth near as much as a real GTO or Roadrunner. And it can even go the other way- if you were to turn certain option levels of a GTX into a Roadrunner clone, you'd DE-value the car! Seems like thats the clone more akin to creating a TF-51 (scratching head....)

Steve L.

[Victor Archer]

And don't forget with muscle cars or any collector car all the part numbers must match, oh and god forbid if you have "salvage" on your pink slip. I have a dash plate and data tags for a 1970 GTX 440 six-pack 4spd Dana rear end, ok lets start the bidding at $5,000 lol I wish.

[AAFO_WSagar]

I could be wrong (frequently ) but, part of the reason for the pricing structure is just the scarcity of the TF's.

Also, and again, I might be wrong, I'm pretty sure though, that a valid, traceable P-51 with a war history, or at least, a service history, is worth more than one that is, essentially, a recreation.

Warbird guys, help me out on this... am I close??

Vlado?? You'd know the answer to this, I'm sure!

Wayne

[Randy Haskin]

Originally posted by AAFO_WSagar
a valid, traceable P-51 with a war history, or at least, a service history, is worth more than one that is, essentially, a recreation.

The real question is....who can tell?

When many of these airplanes are "restored", most of the metal gets replaced anyway. What's the difference?

In researching the book on Cavalier Mustangs I'm penning, I've heard from many people who are hell-bent on finding the original identities of the airplanes. I always have to ask the question...which part of the airframe *is* the airframe?

And...is it really the metal that matters? Or is it the paper (or ID plate) that matters?

There's not really a good argument either way, but the most logical answer is simply that the ID plate is the airplane.

[Vlado]

Wayne & Randy:

Mustangs have not yet made the leap to be on par of traceable automobile restorations in originality and such. In our minds, we like to think so. But, in the market place that has not yet happened.

Recently, a true, traceable war veteran P-51 sold for under $1m. It was in unrestored, shoddy civilian configuration. While a fully restored freshly skinned P-51 will sell for $1.4m+. A friend who runs a Mustang restoration shop only replaces skins that will be bare metal polished or are badly dented. (He is saving the old skins to sell on ebay someday as original NAA stock!!). He often replaces exterior skins for cosmetic reasons and other metal for corrosion/structural reasons. Thus, a large part of the original metal remains with the airframe.

I don't fully understand why, but TF-51s sell for more than stock P-51s. Even conversion TF-51 airframes sell for more than stock airframes. TF-51s also sell for more than TP-51s. (TFs are full dual control airframes while TPs are single seaters with bare minimum controls in the back.)

I'm just reflecting on what's been happening in the market place. Hope this helps.
VL

(I like the axe analogy.........after all, we're always swapping out tires, engines, props,............)

[Randy Haskin]

I like the axe analogy.........after all, we're always swapping out tires, engines, props,............

That's precisely my point. Mustangs aren't any different from any other airplane, which swap out parts and even major assemblies without a thought. How many P-51s out there have the same wing they rolled off the factory floor with? That is a major part of the aircraft, yet nobody blinks an eye at it.

There's an F-15E that suffered a famous high-speed abort due to an afterburner burn-through. The jet was severely damaged and was nearly written off completely.

They shipped the hulk back to the depot and, over the course of a year or more, completely rebuilt the airplane from the ground up.

SO....a large percentage of the metal was different, but the airplane was the same.

What is the difference with a warbird on which the same is done? I say...there is no difference.

While I don't *like* that you can take parts of an aircraft that belonged to one, slap a new ID plate on it, and it becomes another...what alternative do we have?

The option where we value a warbird based on it's percentage of original metal is just plain unsafe, IMHO.