Aleutian PBY-5A

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:54 pm

fabulous pic. i've asked this question countless times with no valid answer........ how come no current or very few flying pby's have the nose / bow turret in place??? is it deemed unsafe?? are they just not practical?? i like them with that turret housing & the gun blisters.

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:05 pm

The American Airpower Museum's PBY seems to have everything that it needs.

Also the Fighter Factory's example for that matter.

But I dont have a real answer to your question Tom. As far as the nose turret goes, I remember hearing somthing about after WWII, regulations were put into place for operating PBY's in civil hands. It included doing away or enclosing the turret due to water splashing up and possibly getting in.

Someone help me out.

daveymac82c · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:14 pm

I don't have any "real" answers as to why the nose turrets are rarely seen these days. I've always wondered the same thing. I always figured that the turrets were removed for better visibility from the cockpit and improved aerodynamics (the Cat needed as much as it could get).

If I were to ever acquire a Catalina/Canso, I would want to put the turret back in the nose, especially since you don't see it often. Maybe it's a very expensive project, maybe it does have something to do with water getting in.

I wish I knew.

Cheers,

David

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:18 pm

Ditto David,

If I had the funds (lets hope one day i do) I'd like to have a stock/military looking PBY on the outside and a nice and luxurious cruiser on the inside to hop from island to island!

I think my dad had the same dream. :roll:

mustangdriver · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:35 pm

Is it a matter of them being hard to find?

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:36 pm

Guessin that would also be a problem in today's world.

Joe Scheil · **Posted:** Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:49 pm

The PBY is in civilian certification the Consolidated Model 28-5ACF.

Part of the certification was removal of all turrets, as the aircraft was to become a non military, or non offensive aircraft. Firewalls redone in stainless steel and rudders redesigned with a mass balance ahead of the hinge line.

Blisters were later added as part of an STC, but they had to be simple fixed blisters with access door panels, not full sliding gun positions.

Our PBY had a clipper bow added by the USN and for us this is a pretty significant modification. The plane was one of four converted by NAS Seattle for passenger/cargo service with Transocean Airlines. A turret would be nice, but involves a lot of work and effort that in my mind, could be better spent elsewhere. Its a big plane. On the water, the Clipper Bow is a bit larger and may cut down on the spray at times, but I havent been on the water in a standard for a while. Today all PBY's are individuals with no two aircraft being identical to another.

The PBY is a fairly rare aircraft for the air, with turrets mostly being on statics. Having the eventual possibility of putting our on the water somewhere in the future, a bow hatch and anchor cleats are so much easier without that troublesome (open) turret!

David Legg · **Joined:** Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:07 pm **Posts:** 338

Joe is right on the button - good explanation. We (Plane Sailing Air Displays) operate a former RCAF Canso A here in the UK and this has a 'clipper bow' - in fact, as an aside, it has had two of those in its career, slightly different shapes. We do have an old bow-turret but the cost of the paperwork, certification etc of the mod to put it back on makes it prohibitive. Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned that the Fighter Factory PBY-5A N9521C flies with a bow turret and in fact this is an example of a PBY where the turret was indeed put back on in place of a clipper bow, the work being done some years ago at Santa Rosa (Aerocrafters from memory) before that aircraft came to Europe, South Africa, Europe again and then Virginia. I was lucky enough to fly in it, the only Cat of several I have flown in to have a bow turret and it certainly gives a different perspective to look out through the bombardier's panel between the pilots legs!

B25PBYGUY · **Posted:** Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:12 pm

I check in here maybe once a month and saw this post. When I'm not flying Liberty Belle, I'm the Fighter Factory's (FF) PBY pilot. Joe is correct mentioning some CAR 3, 4b, airworthiness requirements in that the TC data sheet states if the bow turret is installed, the gun must be removed and the opening faired over. The MTOW is limited to 27,000 lbs for the straight Cat. Place a "clipper" on and you may increase this to 27, 880 lbs.
S.Eng. aerodynamics are enhanced with the clipper since parasitic form drag is reduced. However, it seemed on the Super this was not as great a concern due to a potential additional 500HP (S.Eng.) on the airframe.
Presently, the FF Cat turret is a shell. The FF does have a fully restored turret too and it MAY be installed for next season.
The visual cues for a pilot between the clipper and bow are not that greatly significant. However, when I ferried the AAPM Cat in Nov. '06, its eyeball turret took a little to get used to...well one take off and landing was all I got!

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:22 pm

kind of a double standard, no gun replica in the nose turret of a pby, but all other warbirds are exempt from this?? with replica guns protruding everywhere?? makes no sense!! who came up with this assinine policy??

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:20 pm

Interesting bit of info there B-25PBYGUY

Very interested in the multi engined warbirds and whats it like to fly them.

Joe Scheil · **Posted:** Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:25 am

Well the policy is not really asinine, as the plane was certified to be a general jack of all trades, and the big part of the initial 28-5ACF certification was to be an airliner in remote areas. The bush flying aspects the the job require the highest possible weights and safety of operation, and as far as docking or mooring the plane, the turret is just in the way. Remember too that this is an open turret, not some enclosed B-17 type thing. The place was miserable and cold....as well as tough to fight out of. But I suppose in the context of history that doesn't really matter.

Looks wise I really prefer the clipper bow and its added utility...but then these things really are neat on the water....and being the bowman is a special treat...
Though flying the big old bird is best....

http://www.catalina.org.uk/catalina-latest-news

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:55 am

Quote:

who came up with this assinine policy??

Geez Tom settle down there...........
You musta had an extra helping of Count Chocula for breakfast this morning eh???
Your fangs are out :shock:

BLR · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 2:47 pm **Posts:** 425

For us uneducated on things Canso/Catalina, does the RCAF Canso in this photo have a Clipper Bow? Info off the site says the photo was taken in 1960 in Vancouver BC, the bridge in the background is the Lions Gate Bridge.

It would be nice to see a Canso restored to a post war SAR paint scheme like this.

Photo source: COPA National website

Brian

Warbird Information Exchange

Aleutian PBY-5A

Who is online