It sat there for a long time and then disappeared; somebody flew it out.
Before I knew better, I’ve flown worse. I got a checkout once in a very old C152 in Texas, and the CFI checking me out refused to fly west due to the hills, saying “when the engine fails, we’re more likely to survive a landing in the flat areas.” He was right of course, but I was pretty surprised by his complete lack of confidence in the aircraft. The aircraft burned about a quart every hour. I never had any problem with it, but only flew it about 12 hours over a 2 week period. It was about $80/hr wet.
I think we have all flown worse. One just doesn’t have a reference when one is starting up.
Contrary to some views here, my reaction is to wonder why stuff gets left in corroded and potentially unsafe condition when it is relatively easy to fix, not impossible to fix.
I think the reason is labor cost, which I wouldn’t being paying for something like this – I’d be doing it myself. Once you get it all apart and start fixing or replacing individual pieces it doesn’t seem so bad. Having said that a local hangar neighbor who last year rebuilt his Marchetti’s landing gear to a very high standard was (as always on that plane) amazed by the cost of parts where needed so costs may depend on the type. My Marchetti friend did some serious begging and scrounging before getting all that he needed.
Yes that is very true. A lot of planes are left to rot because of limited legal options for fixing them.
Even the very basic process for transplanting a part from one to another is fraught with problems; you only need to look at past threads on that topic to see no two people in the business agree on what is or is not legal.
One can (and does) a lot of stuff off the books but one doesn’t want to do that with a retractable landing gear because the parts tend to be serialised 
In the FAA system you just need an A&P to inspect the parts and declare them airworthy and they can be fitted.
