Question for Eric Downing

[needle]

Eric,

A few questions about the tires on your Skyraider.

Whilst I was at the Cavanaugh today, the mechanics were doing tire changes (bearings, brakes, etc) on the Skyraider, and I was quite surprised at how solid (and thick) the old tire actually was. I think they said it was a 24 ply. Absolutely no sidewall give at all, and the bead thickness had to be at least an inch.

From an earlier thread about flying/operating warbirds you stated:

Tires are a whole different issue, the Skyraider is very tough on tires. 50 landings on a set is about all you get. They are readily available at $1600 a set plus $600 for a set of tubes, new, but I have them retreaded much cheaper, and the retreads seem to hold up a little better.

Just out of personal interest, and I don't need to know the serial numbers , but what make and ply of tire are you currently using on your Skyraider. Are you using a Goodyear 24 ply, how many times can you risk getting a retread done, and do you get the retreads done locally?

I don't know what ply the replacement tires were, but I don't think they were as high as 24 ply.

Thanks,

Julian

[EDowning]

Thanks for the inquiry.

The tires are 32 x 8.8 and are available in a 24 ply like the ones you saw today being removed or in 15 ply like the ones you saw being installed. I get somewhere between 50 and sixty landings before the need to be retreaded. The 24 plys cannot be retreaded and I don't like the way they wear. They show several layers of cord after only a few landings, and even though they are servieable for many more landings, they are a nightmare at airshows because every well meaning attendee has to come up and tell me my tires are wore out.

I use the Goodyear 15 plys, they are readily available through Desser. They are the same tires that are used on the B52 outriggers. As I stated in the previous thread you referenced, the tubes are very expensive, between 400 and 600 a pair.

Desser provides a retread service, in California, and the retreads wear a little better than the originals. They put them through a tread separation test after each retread and they can be done many times if they pass the general condition and separation tests.

Someone else asked about tire pressure, we run them filled with nitrogen, between 98psi and 130 depending on gross weight. My airplane is fairly light, usually around 19,000lbs, so 98psi is most common.

Let me know if I can answer anything else.

[needle]

Eric,

Thanks for the response.

Another question, or more like an observation.

The rear compartment, from the ground, looks quite spacious.

When you actually sit in the seats, the floor is so close to the seat bottom, that for someone my size (6'0"), my knees are almost under my chin. (I suppose I shall just have to always sit "up front" ). Not as much of an issue if nobody is sat opposite, but it must get very "cosy" when there are 4 people, and 8 legs, back there. (I suppose the rear passengers could always gain a bit of extra cushion height by using a seat pack chute).

Is the floor the same in the rear compartment of your aircraft, and if so, have any of your passengers commented on the "leg arrangements"?

Was the floor height different when the rear compartment was being used in its "military configuration"?

Thanks again for your responses, and for your Skyraider insight.

Julian

[EDowning]

No, the compartments are the same height in all four of the surviving AD5s, I always have everyone wear chutes, but it's not very often that we have four in the back. You may have also noticed that for an airplane the size of the AD5 the cockpit up front is rather small. I'm only 5' 10" so it's not much of a problem, much tighter if your taller.

Are you going to crew on the Cavanaugh Skyraider? If so, watch out for Doug, once he gets used to flying the Spad, it will be hard to see out the front wind screen past his ear to ear grin.

[51fixer]

Eric,

Thanks for the response.

Another question, or more like an observation.

The rear compartment, from the ground, looks quite spacious.

When you actually sit in the seats, the floor is so close to the seat bottom, that for someone my size (6'0"), my knees are almost under my chin. (I suppose I shall just have to always sit "up front" ). Not as much of an issue if nobody is sat opposite, but it must get very "cosy" when there are 4 people, and 8 legs, back there. (I suppose the rear passengers could always gain a bit of extra cushion height by using a seat pack chute).

Is the floor the same in the rear compartment of your aircraft, and if so, have any of your passengers commented on the "leg arrangements"?

Was the floor height different when the rear compartment was being used in its "military configuration"?

Thanks again for your responses, and for your Skyraider insight.

Julian

IIRC the 4 seat setup in back is for officers only.
I believe the enlisted version has a cloth bench on each side and it was seating for 12 of your closest friends. 6 on each side. (Skyraider Airlines, I don't want to see a picture of the Flight Attendant!)
I also remember a setup in which a pulley is attached on the wing tip and when the wing is folded it is used to hoist stretcher cases into the aft compartment.
For long missions an oil drum could be secured into the seating area and oil would be transfered to the oil tank in flight as certain missions could require you the fly so long you might exhaust your oil supply. Yes, you could run out of oil before fuel!
AD-5 is quite a craft and it must have served the Navy well in its time.
I really enjoyed working on Dick Bertea's and even a little on Bob Pond's.
Rich

[needle]

Eric,

watch out for Doug, once he gets used to flying the Spad, it will be hard to see out the front wind screen past his ear to ear grin.

Don't tell Doug, but that is why I was just double checking how much room would be "left" in other parts of the plane...

Julian

[EDowning]

51fixer wrote:

AD-5 is quite a craft and it must have served the Navy well in its time.
I really enjoyed working on Dick Bertea's and even a little on Bob Pond's.

How did you go from that noble avocation to working on those pointy things? And even using it as your screen name. I know how it starts, you overhaul a Skyraider starter or two and next thing you know, it crosses your mind, if that starter was water cooled, that little starter might be able to power a little airplane.....

Just kidding, the pics you posted of all the Mustangs in the mait hangar is cool.

[retroaviation]

Eric & Doug, just a hint here........If my memory from the recent Nellis Air Show serves me right, the outrigger tires on the B-52 were the same size as your Skyraider tires (32x8.. However, they were at least 24 ply, perhaps more. One beefy lookin' tire. Certainly there's a source for those tires and they might last a bit longer for you. Just a thought.

Gary

[51fixer]

Eric & Doug, just a hint here........If my memory from the recent Nellis Air Show serves me right, the outrigger tires on the B-52 were the same size as your Skyraider tires (32x8.. However, they were at least 24 ply, perhaps more. One beefy lookin' tire. Certainly there's a source for those tires and they might last a bit longer for you. Just a thought.

Gary

The B-52 tires have long been used. They fit F6F, Corsair and Skyraider. The problem is that they wear down to the cord on the edges pretty fast. Particularly if you are using them after the AF has used them on the Buffs.
You know that there are 24 layers of cord to go through but the FAA starts jumping up and down and getting that grounded look when they see that cord.
I remember a story at Pacific Fighters of an annual being done on an AD-4. The tires were replaced the year before. There was 0 air pressure in the tires. But to look at them the side wall wasn't hardly deflected at all. It had flown maybe 15 hrs the previous year IIRC, maybe more. With the B-52 tire it just doesn't have any give it is so thick.
Rich