My entry for Airliners next year...

[Adam the Akrodude]

Only issue Brad is what you're planning to enter isn't operating as a airliner in military guise now is it.

[tor lives]

Only issue Brad is what you're planning to enter isn't operating as a airliner in military guise now is it.

However it is a derivative of an airliner, which makes it technically legal according to the category entry criteria.
As said, this will be interesting .
TOR

[Adam the Akrodude]

"may pertain to civil airliners in mitary or government service". Fw-200C was NEVER a civil airliner, nor was it built to be or ever operated as. Check your history folks.

[tor lives]

"may pertain to civil airliners in mitary or government service". Fw-200C was NEVER a civil airliner, nor was it built to be or ever operated as. Check your historiiy folks.

Ohhh but I beg to differ.... the FW-200C is by any definition a "derivative" of the original airliner design, thereby ensuring its eligibility in the Airliner category under the current stated criteria for entry. Some may not agree with this, but that's the way it currrently stands.
TOR

[Ansett A330]

Bravo

I wouldn't go that far - if he was really brave he'd take on the old tool kit from 1971!

So I assume you have ???
TOR

Late 70s or early 80s. Yeah it's been packed away since 1996. Suspect it's brail finish will have reacted with the packing beads a long time ago so it probably has more dimples than a golf ball now ...

[BradG]

"may pertain to civil airliners in mitary or government service". Fw-200C was NEVER a civil airliner, nor was it built to be or ever operated as. Check your history folks.

Several C's were built as government transports. Besides as written, it includes the word "derivatives" and says "may", doesn't say "must". I know, I'm pushing the rules, but that creates interest. See even RayS is on board now.

[oz rb fan]

didn't Hitler and Goering have personal FW200c's as their own personal transport?...i like this thinking out of the box.........especially after our own destroyer's LEM going up against a scratch built ABRAMs

[BradG]

didn't Hitler and Goering have personal FW200c's as their own personal transport?...i like this thinking out of the box.........especially after our own destroyer's LEM going up against a scratch built ABRAMs

Those were the C's I mentioned, two or 3 of them were modified; no bomb bays, cut down gondola etc.

[Adam the Akrodude]

"may pertain to civil airliners in mitary or government service". Fw-200C was NEVER a civil airliner, nor was it built to be or ever operated as. Check your history folks.

Several C's were built as government transports. Besides as written, it includes the word "derivatives" and says "may", doesn't say "must". I know, I'm pushing the rules, but that creates interest. See even RayS is on board now.

Issue I personally have with this idea is the wording used is very clear as posted by you - Airliner Derivatives – May pertain to civil airliners in military or government service.


Yes, the Fw-200C can be considered a airliner derivative, but you and I both know the pre-war politics behind this. Just how many Fw-200's were built and used as airliners - 10 isn't it? Next, the version you want to enter into Airliner cat was never built or used as a airliner at all - it was built purely as a maritime aircraft - nothing else. What you plan to build is not nor ever was a civil airliner in military service at all - it's 100% military.

Build whatever you want of course and enter it into whatever category you like, but in my opinion what you are doing does not comply with the very ruling you have posted above. By your logic, a He-111 is equally as suitable as is a P-8 and any of the "E" derivate 707, 737, 747, 757, 767 - in fact anything that can claim a "airliner" ancestry that ended up in the military yes? There is a reason that there is a Airliner category at Expo - that's to enter airliners and airliners used in military and government service. Fw-200C8 is not a airliner.

[BradG]

Then what does that rule cover? How can you expect to have a civil airliner derivative in the military, without it being militarised? Is that not the whole point of using the word "derivative"?