Warbird Information Exchange

My understanding is that it was done for simplicity. The routing of the lines overhead was simpler to do (and safer since they were sub hunters). This was most of the reason that they were in the overhead on many of the flying boats and amphibs too. Since the engines were mounted on the high-set wing, it made more sense to simply relocate the engine controls to the overhead where it'd take fewer pulleys and bellcranks and thus fewer chances for failure.

Skybolt2003,
CAPFlyer pretty much hit the nail on the head. The -5 or P-2E had the throttles and etc on the pedestal, when the -7 or P-2H came out they had redesigned the flight deck which was also raised higher and made larger with better visibility, thus it was easier to route the cables and such on the overhead and run them down the sides of the forward fuselage to the front wing spar and out to the nacelles. The P-2 has always been one of my favorite aircraft along with the S-2, and C-119. I seem to have an odd taste in aircraft I guess, I do know they were all used as air tankers, Hmmmm curious I wonder if that is why I like them so much, being that I'm tanker trash at heart!

Scott.........

I haven't had a chance to take pictures around a P2V-5 this year,but I'll add a few pictures from 1980.The P2V-1 through the P2V-6 had a conventional throttle quadrant.The P2V-7 had a number of design changes,including bulging out the cockpit windows and adding a small fuselage plug that moved the pilot's seats a bit farther away from the prop tips than in the earlier models.The other most noticable change was a considerable lightening of the nosewheel strut.

This is Evergreen's Tanker 141 flying out of Alamogordo in 1980.I went along to read the ignition analyzer for them.The most impressive feature of the P2V to me was how noisy they are in the cockpit.





These pictures are of one of Black Hill's P2V-5's at Alamogordo,also in 1980

Larry,
You have all of the way Cool pictures!

Scott...........

that totally makes sense, an of course now that you all mention it. of course I notice the difference in the cockpit.
One other thing I noticed in thelatest round of pictures from Larry, the nacelles seem to hang low in front. At first I thought it was only on the derelicts, maybe sagging mounts, but realized it's on the flyer too. Never noticed it before.
-Bret

That is an intentional deal. Usually you only see a few degrees of displacement, but due to the way the aircraft was operated, the P2V has a much more "apparent" deviation from the aircraft centerline. The reason for this is twofold. One is to improve engine performance and cooling during slow-speed flight (i.e. keep the engines more in line with the direction of flight than in line with the wing) and the second is partly because of a "feature" of the aircraft - separateable QECs. The P2Vs had (have?) explosive bolts fitted to the engine mounts to allow them to be "blown off" in case of damage in an attempt to keep the plane airborne by getting rid of the burning powerplant. I've never heard the full story on this system, but have had its existance confirmed. The slanting of the nacelles and firewall helps to ensure that the QEC departs the aircraft by falling beneath it instead of flipping over the wing.

There are some interesting stories out there about the P2V that I've heard from a member of the DFW wing who used to fly them. It was a good plane, but prone to fuel leaks, and that made things VERY interesting on one flight. I'll have to record the story from him and post it here one day.

Please do!

There is a really good book about the P-2V from its inception up to becoming an air tanker, even though the air tanker portion is pretty short and vague. The book is: Lockheed P2V Neptune An Illustrated History, author is Wayne Mutza. At one time Milo Peltzer (sp) was working on an air tanker book I sure wish he would finish it, If you to get pictures from all of the guys that have worked on and flew them over the years you could have one heck of an illustrated history of air tankers and fire fighting.

Scott..........

..

...This shows the severe downward prop/engine thrust line relative to the fuselage/wing...





...

Larry,
Anything new going on yet? I'm up in Boise for the next month for work, nice and toasty here!

Scott.........

We had a bit of activity out of Medford a few days ago.We ended up dropping 3 loads of retardant on the Kirby Mainline Fire near Cave Junction.I managed to take 3 pictures of the fire when we first arrived,but was too busy to dig out the camera after that.Bruce Smith,the Air Attack in the back seat of our Alaska ASM PC-7 managed to get some good video of some of the drops.He used a capture program to get a few stills,which I'll post here.Anyone who has tried using a capture program will excuse the less than perfect quality,but I think that they are worth posting.Tanker 22 came over to Medford and spend a couple of days here,whih gave me a chance to take some exterior shots.

This is the Kirby Mainline Fire when we first got there.The view is looking toward the southeast in the first shot and almost east by the 3rd.The fire was started by copper theives who stole copper wiring out of buildings in Cave Junction and were burning the insulation off of the wires to make it easier to sell.Unfortunately,this is happening more and more these days.







These are captured frames from the video featuring T62









This is the "Yellow Peril" PC-7.These guys,Gary Doyle and Bruce Smith are actually very helpful in acting as both lead and air attack.They normally launch with us and we really miss them if they aren't available for some reason.The pics in the hangar show how Photo Shop can lighten shadows to save a shot.







Here are some pictures featuring T62 and T22 at Medford

Scott.........

.
...T-22 at SBD...25 July 1999...

...the radome matched the rest of the red in those days...


.

Larry

Excellent shots!

Have you by any chance heard anything recently about Tanker 65 (C-54 N8502R)?

There are some rumours in the mill that TBM sold this Skymaster to Brooks in Alaska.

Thanks

Larry,
Once again you do all of us a real service by taking the time to do your detailed 'walk arounds' of tankers so we can all appreciate every angle and detail, it also helps those who model tankers get the details 'just right'

Do you suppose another reason for the sharply negative thrust line on NEPTUNE engines had anything to do with the airframe in it's first life having to shove that plastic boulder mounted under the fuselage around?

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-