www.ebay.com/itm/251365411461
just spot this one on ebay, it looks quite strange to me…
I remember a good flute player in London told me she bought one marked R&R and found out it was an old copy of the famous brand…
What exactly do you find strange? Looks OK to me. Seems like maybe in the late 2000 series s/n#, perhaps. No interlocked C & C# key touches. The upper block for the high C is a bit closer to LH2 than you might always see.
Could be real… Then again, they had forgeries around that time. It would be good to get a better photo of the stamp. Serial number? 
The Cnat key doesn’t look like a Rudall key, might be a repair…
Yeah, looks like they’ve used a long F key from another flute, doesn’t it? It’s a shame about the short F key too. That could be expensive, I should think.
It looks quite like one of my Rudalls - an early one with the silver indicator pin like this one, and a very similar foot joint, with lapped rather than interlocked keys.
Seller is Chris Algar, wellknown dealer in instruments, concertinas usually. He’s sound.
I would say that keys are GS and not original shape: not the C#/C , not the C’, and not convinced by the rest of them too. Also Rings are bit too wide too. Wood looks ok, but no Serial on a 1000/2000 series…
Agree with you about the C’ (which does seem to be a replacement), but the rings and lowers keys look like many other R&Rs you can find images of all over Google.
Agreed. The rings and lower keys look completely normal to me. Just like one of mine. Bet they’re sterling too. I’d bet it’s too early a flute for them to be GS. Plus, they look like sterling to me.
I don’t think they are silver, to green…
I wonder what year it was when they started using nickel keys?
I wouldn’t put the seller in question, if it is a fraud he may have no idea. R&R had a lot of fraud at that time, that is why R&R started putting certificates in the cases, signed by the makers… I have seen RR&C’s with no serial numbers but nothing this early.
It’s German Silver for sure. It’s real.
Hmmm. 1823 Alpacca. 1832 Birmingham got into the game. 1840 Brittania Metal. Would this flute fall into this time frame? Maillechort was discovered c. 1827 in Lyons. 1840 saw widespread Engish adoption for cutlery.
Bob
I’ve dealt with Chris Algar before and found him to be trustworthy and honest.
My 2p worth : The metal work doesn’t look like sterling, nickel silver IMO.
What looks unusual to me is the shape of the key blocks, smaller and more rounded than I’ve seen before on R+R flutes, particularly the foot joint.
OK, I see that, and they do look peculiar, compared to other examples, which is suspicious. I was able to find an R&R supposedly via Clementi that had smaller, rounded blocks on the foot keys (although a giant rounded block for the touches), and some Wylde flutes with a small rounded block for the low C guide block.
The spacing of the lines of text in the stamp on both the barrel and the top joint seems rather large compared to that of my own much later, 1892, Rudall Carte 8 key.
The spacing is also larger, and the rounded foot joint blocks are different compared to the square shouldered blocks of this contemporary Rudall & Rose:
"Flute by Rudall & Rose, London, ca. 1824-1837. Serial no. 2868. Stamped on body: RUDALL & ROSE / No 15 PIAZZA / COVENT GARDEN / LONDON; on tuning slide barrel, lower body, and foot joint: RUDALL & ROSE / LONDON. "
http://orgs.usd.edu/nmm/Flutes/RudallRoseCarte/1347/RudallRose1347.html
Foot joint blocks
http://orgs.usd.edu/nmm/Flutes/RudallRoseCarte/1347/1347Rudall&RoseflutefootjointdetailLG.jpg
Prehaps they used different stamps at the Covent Garden address? But the spacing, the lack of a serial number, plus the rounded foot joint blocks mentioned by Dominic (my later Rudall & Carte also has square shouldered foot joint blocks) puts me in alert mode.
Think he’s actually been quite commendably careful here. So (at risk of pointing out the obvious) not only has he told us he knows very little about flutes and took a gamble here, but at no point does he state categorically that it’s a Rudall and Rose, listing it merely as ‘Antique Wooden Flute stamped Rudall and Rose’ and continuing to say:
It is marked “Rudall and Rose”, London, on three sections but on one section it says- what I take to be-“Rudall and Rose,Piazza, Covent Garden, London”.
I wouldn’t put the seller in question either, the pics are genuine and so the description.
The flute is not a recent copy, but IMO, and old copy.
No serial, Stamps are unusual and miss the address no.
The shape of C#/C is not in the RR style.
(others keys may have replaced somewhere in time, much rare this happend on the lower ones).
Nickel silver is not used in the 1000/2000 series.
I checked pics in my Rudall’s archive and haven’t found something very similar.
Still an Old RR copy is maybe much rare than an original one 
I like Terry’s investigation of the fake Rudall & Rose (or in his case R U D A I L)
http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/RR_fake.htm
Chris Algar is a trustworthy dealer so I hope he hasn’t paid too much for this flute. Nonetheless it could be a good player
This “trusty dealer” cannot even take a photo of the makers mark, claiming that he doesn’t have a good camera? Does it take a good camera to turn the flute section to the lens, instead of taking a shot from the side? If it was authentic, it might be worth restoring, but his reply makes me want to run from bidding on this item!