Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:06 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:41 pm
Posts: 10
Hello,
I would like to add some info here. I am familiar with this aircraft since it spent many years in my hangar as it was getting started as Project Tomahawk in the late 80's. I also spent a few years on the board of directors, so I have been following it since it went to England and I am glad it's home now. It does have the proper Curtiss electric propeller, so yes the blades are hollow. But of more significance and really if ever has it been mentioned is the engine. Allison 1710-15 is very rare to begin with. But that particular engine has great historical significance, the serial number had been traced back to being shipped to China with the AVG And some how making it back to the U.S. durring rebuild many inconsistencies were found that did not match drawings and overhaul manuals, this was later found out to be due to the way the engines were assembled at the factory. The U.S. gov't had claim to all the engines coming off the line so engine assemblers were given the task of using parts that weren't necessarily to spec. So each engine was essentially custom built and there for had slight variations and by most accounts they were extremely good engines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 10:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:40 am
Posts: 987
Yikes. That sucks. Glad pilot is okay. Any landing you can walk away from......


Chappie

_________________
Brrring. Dispersal? TWO SECTIONS SCRAMBLE!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:36 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:26 pm
Posts: 2002
Location: Creemore Ontario Canada
Thanks for the insight wacopilot.
First hand info is always welcomed here!

Andy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2014 9:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:22 am
Posts: 622
Location: VA, USA
Shocking how quickly bad stuff can happen in aviation. It was just a little while ago I was worried about that poor P-40 getting it's paint scuffed in the shipping container.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2014 9:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 7:10 pm
Posts: 883
Location: Burlington, WI
FAA preliminary data is up. Ground loop resulting in gear collapse. Sad to see them in this condition. Hope to see it back up soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 02, 2014 5:29 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 1748
Location: atlanta,georgia
Sabremech wrote:
FAA preliminary data is up. Ground loop resulting in gear collapse. Sad to see them in this condition. Hope to see it back up soon.

From the damage "soon" will be around 2 years, provided they have a spare prop assy.

_________________
Hang The Expense


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 15, 2014 11:42 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:31 pm
Posts: 1655
Ground loop. Darn.

The P-40 is fairly benign on the runway within narrow limits. But beyond those limits it rapidly goes beyond recovery. Even the long-tail models.

I teach that you simply CAN'T let a swerve get established on a P-40.

Dave


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:21 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:34 pm
Posts: 2906
Jim Harley posted pictures of the P-40 on Facebook. It is back in one piece and awaiting a test flight. Here is one of the pics, unscrupulously linked from Facebook:


Image

Jim posted them here:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 8:14 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:48 pm
Posts: 1658
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
This is the Pearl Harbor survivor, correct? I've always wondered, how much of that aircraft is actually original?

This is one of the warbirds I've always had a problem with the idea of being airworthy.

f4intel wrote:
Is it just me or does it seem like gear-related mishaps seem to be the bane of the Warbird movement?

You're telling me.

_________________
Tri-State Warbird Museum Collections Manager & Museum Attendant

Warbird Philosophy Webmaster


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 10:08 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:13 pm
Posts: 5645
Location: Minnesota, USA
Noha307 wrote:

f4intel wrote:
Is it just me or does it seem like gear-related mishaps seem to be the bane of the Warbird movement?

You're telling me.



I had understood that the damage to P-40M 43-5813 was caused by a leaking oil cooler resulting in complete engine failure, and that the gear damage occured after the plane left the runway while landing deadstick.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviat ... 111&akey=1

Seems kind of a stretch to label this episode a "gear-related mishap"...or is there more to the story than the NTSB reported?

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:33 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 1:54 am
Posts: 5120
Location: Stratford, CT.
Like the paint adjustment on 284. Now who wants to see these two together:

Image

Image

_________________
Keep Em' Flying,
Christopher Soltis

Dedicated to the preservation and education of The Sikorsky Memorial Airport

CASC Blog Page: http://ctair-space.blogspot.com/
Warbird Wear: https://www.redbubble.com/people/warbirdwear/shop

Chicks Dig Warbirds.......right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:15 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 2476
Location: New Zealand
Noha307 wrote:
This is the Pearl Harbor survivor, correct? I've always wondered, how much of that aircraft is actually original?

This is one of the warbirds I've always had a problem with the idea of being airworthy.

f4intel wrote:
Is it just me or does it seem like gear-related mishaps seem to be the bane of the Warbird movement?

You're telling me.


As I understand it virtually none, when recovered the remains were noted as 'bite sized chunks.' Photos taken when the original group was rebuilding it show all new structure.
So I would be overly concerned about it flying 'historically speaking.'

_________________
Classic Wings Magazine

https://www.classicwings.com/

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/ClassicWingsMagazine/

Preserved Axis Aircraft

http://www.classicwings.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:22 am
Posts: 622
Location: VA, USA
Warbird Kid wrote:
Like the paint adjustment on 284. Now who wants to see these two together:

Image

Image


Which one is most correct? Numerals smooshed together or applied with some space between them?

Or, are both documented original a/c?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 5:46 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 3:57 pm
Posts: 2266
Location: Minnesota
I don't think there was a real standard. The Rod Lewis P-40C, in George Welch markings, is accurate to all of the best depictions I've seen of the original aircraft. The Collings' (former TFC) P-40B is based on an original photo of the aircraft (as seen below). Perhaps there was only so much area of the fuselage that was designated for applying the 'buzz numbers' (say, between the stars and formation lights), and since the George Welch scheme had a '1' in the number, there was more room to play with/spread them out?

Image

More examples of different 'buzz number' applications around the same time/place:

Image

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 8:26 pm
Posts: 622
Noha307 wrote:
This is the Pearl Harbor survivor, correct? I've always wondered, how much of that aircraft is actually original?

This is one of the warbirds I've always had a problem with the idea of being airworthy.

.


Thus the beauty of the free market system. If you have a problem with it you can pony up the 3 million or so and try to buy it. However, without a massive infusion of cash from a private individual it would still be a pile of parts in the back of a hangar at Torrance. That private individual wouldn't have put the money into it if it couldn't be flown.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], mike furline, Woodsy Airfield and 311 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group