I know I shouldn't put half a finger in this mess, but still thank you for the sweet mention Andrew

I am sympathetic to their cause, to some extent - I got published when I was 15 in the French magazine dedicated to computer wargames for a monster scenario on TOAW1 (I used every inch of the available space on the map that wouldn't require the player to run OPART 500 I think!). Let's say it was the first obvious external indication that I had that bug in me, and 20 years later here I am.
Now now. Making scenarios is easy. I did it, and I will do it again for my game (if it ever comes out, that is). But starting a new game from scratch without a motivated and skilled team sounds very adventurous. Still, TOAW is no black magic, Norm Koger kept it simple from the beginning. The genius and the generosity of the design is in its versatility, not its complexity - akin to Steel Panthers for instance, but technically the complete opposite of WitP or WitE, if I want to keep using Gary Grisby-based metaphors. I think that cloning TOAW really ain't the end of the world, but you need someone who's good at modern, up to date coding AND loves the series. This is where things get tricky.
My dev loves the PTO, loves planes and has all the basic culture one would need to bring us to the end of this long journey. I wish them luck in finding a guy like him - but it ain't simple. I have a few in mind, but they all started their own thing - in the age of Unity of command, or Radio Commander/General, it is not easy to convince a young chap to get back to the basics while only marginally improving on them. Obviously, we're not remaking Great Naval Battles, Pacific Air War or Fighting Steel with the graphics and mechanics of the time - we embarked ourselves on something new and this is partly what keeps us motivated. Like some others say, I am not sure TOAW absolutely needs to be remade, it served and still serves its purpose - and might still do so for the decade to come the way it is.