Scooby
-
Content Count
6,419 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Scooby
-
-
All -1D apparently had the taller tail gear, but so did many -1A and some -1 and -2. They were retrofit as the visibility issue was real important to pilots.
I know this for sure.
All 2s had the higher tail wheel. Bu the time the 2s were being built the 1D production was well underway. All the 1D aircraft were allotted and there were no airframes set aside for 2 production. Therefore war weary 1s were used for 2 production.
The 1s were upgraded to the same standards as the 1Ds (except the canopy change). This included the higher tailwheel.
-
Out of the factory A's did have the frame. Ds didn't.
Incorrect. From the factory early Ds had the frames as well. The change in canopy happened during the D production run, not when the change was made from A to D.
A few early Ds had the frame. But most had the bubble.
I'll need to check my references again.
But Mario wasn't saying that. He was saying they were all mixed.
-
I don't think the Corsair had the rocket launchers added until the -4 model - probably had something to do with the fabic covered wings. Also I believe (I'm taking this off the top of my head, reference books not handy right now) the -1A had reinforcing strips on the cockpit which the -1D didn't have.
1D's were the first ones to carry rockets.
Regarding the Canopy Frame, some D's carried the two frames atop the canopy, and some A's didn't, so it's more a random issue of a particular bird.
The leading edge tanks Yeah, that's an issue but I think it CAN be overlooked.... I think :unsure:
Take Care
Out of the factory A's did have the frame. Ds didn't.
-
One reason that we got rid of the Chinooks was the very high maintenance costs along with delaminating rotor blades which finally killed some good people...including a good friend. Ron survived major cancer problems only to have the Chinook finish him and his crew off one night in Edmonton.
We have always been an air force using someone elses left-overs or politically motivated crap that no-one else wanted but I agree that we really need new SAR equipment along with TAC transport. We can only dream of operating C-17s...wot...us get new tech machines!!!!!!!!!!! I doubt it.
With all the bloody tax money the government is gouging out of us lately...along with the Military Pension Fund that they have stolen, we could be a first rate air force again...instead...I won't go there.
Barney
We bought C models, which were notorious for maintenance problems.
I recall the day all three were in the air at once. They had all the Squadrons line the flightline to see them go by.
For those who didn't know about the flypast it was easy enough to feel the Chinooks as they approached the base. The ground was shaking.
Chinooks don't fly. They just make so much noise the earth repeled them.
Sorry to hear about Ron. Was he killed on the delivery of the first Chinook?
I hear a simple upgrade to D model standard would have solved all our problems.
-
Looks to me like the canopy Jettison lever is always pinned on the ground (good plan)
Wow, good eye! Never noticed that before and a great touch.
;)
Cheers,
You better have.
Whenever I allow people in the cockpit I always point out the three safety issues.
I've showed you around the unit before haven't I?
-
Looks to me like the canopy Jettison lever is always pinned on the ground (good plan)
Wow, good eye! Never noticed that before and a great touch.
;)
Cheers,
Two pins in the cockpit.
Canopy and Seat ring. As well, the seat de-activation is up.
Yes, good eye.
-
Good news.
It must be the Pro-Modeler kit.
-
A natural act in a situation like that where there is extreme noise it to cover your ears. Why is nobody, not 1, is covering their ears? ,not even the child in the lady's arms is doing this. I call BullS**T.
Cheers
Good eye bear.
-
What about some nice EH101s to go alongside the Cormorants?
The Cormorants are EH-101s. We were always buying a stripped down version for SAR. The government just renamed it to fool the public.
But I did miss that. We should buy some EH-101s for the boats.
-
I thought most of those were fakes.
-
Im talking loading of wounded, while keeping the bags elevated and all the accompaning machines that go "PINNG". Never worked with a twin otter myself, it just seems small for a mass cas situation.
Course then again how many times did I shove someone into the back of a Kiowa to get them to a civi hospital in a hurry. Least 3 I can remember.
One of those "should" have gone a a backboard but time was the factor, and luckily all turned out well.
Yep we use what we get, but if we are going shopping , we should shop for the vehicle that can do the job.
I sort of like what they are proposing. Except I would buy 40 Hercs, 20 C-17s, and 15 of those C-27s.
We deperately need the CH-47s.
-
Air force plan would replace ageing fleet
Cheaper to buy new aircraft than to maintain some older planes
Chris Wattie
National Post
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
The Canadian air force wants to spend $6-billion on a fleet of more than 50 new transport and search-and-rescue aircraft under a proposal to be presented to Cabinet this month, the National Post has learned.
Senior defence sources said the air force is putting the finishing touches on an "omnibus" plan to solve the looming crisis in its air transport system.
The plan would allow the Canadian Forces to buy badly needed replacements for its Hercules cargo planes, long overdue new search-and-rescue aircraft and a fleet of new heavy-lift helicopters in one fell swoop.
"There are big air mobility issues to deal with and there's a certain urgency to this," said one senior official familiar with the plan. "If it's not addressed soon, it will become critical."
The plan has not yet been approved by Bill Graham, the Defence Minister.
But the source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, "The department is making this a priority for the fall ... this is something we're going to look at putting to government as soon as possible."
The proposal now on the table would see the Department of National Defence buying between 15 and 20 of the latest model of Lockheed Martin's long-serving Hercules transport plane, the C-130J, to replace its fleet of model E Hercules, which are more than 40 years old.
It also includes 15 new fixed-wing search-and-rescue planes -- likely the Italian-made C-27J Spartan -- long overdue replacements for six CC-115 Buffalo aircraft now in service in British Columbia.
The air force also wants to buy 20 CH-47 Chinooks -- twin-rotor helicopters capable of carrying as many as 44 soldiers or more than 13 tonnes of cargo, vehicles or heavy weapons in overseas theatres such as Afghanistan.
The bill for the new aircraft and the necessary support and servicing contracts would come in at more than $6-billion, at least some of which will have to be new money allocated by Cabinet to the defence budget, the sources said.
The acquisition of the new planes would be spread over the next five to 10 years, but the air force has already said it needs to replace the Buffalos and the oldest of its Hercules planes by 2010 at the latest.
The plan does not directly address the Canadian Forces' need for strategic airlift -- long-distance, heavy-lift cargo planes capable of flying hundreds of tonnes of equipment or supplies around the globe.
"The piece that's missing ... is strategic airlift," said one senior air force officer. "That's going to be addressed somehow, but whether it's buying new aircraft or leasing or joining some sort of strategic lift 'pool' has not been decided."
The Canadian Forces air transport fleet has been struggling for years with ageing aircraft and mounting maintenance costs.
Air force officials said the Hercules have already begun hitting the end of their effective lifespans -- five years before the military expected to begin replacing its workhorse cargo aircraft.
Lieutenant-Colonel Bruce Cooke, the program and engineering manager for the Hercules fleet, said two of the oldest planes have reached their "ultimate economic lifespan" -- the point at which it costs more to maintain them than it would to buy a new aircraft.
"We're almost at a point now where that is a real option," Lt.-Col. Cooke said. "The amount of money we're putting into the old airframes ironically could be very, very similar in costs to going out and buying a new airframe."
The military's ailing air transport system was dealt another blow this month after a safety bulletin from Lockheed-Martin, the U.S.-based manufacturer of the Hercules, recommended expensive and time-consuming inspections for potentially disastrous cracks in the aircraft's wings.
Two of the air force's oldest Hercules are already over the limit of 50,000 flying hours, the point at which Lockheed-Martin recommends grounding the aircraft for extensive testing, and four more are quickly approaching that level.
That will mean 18 of the air force's 32 CC-130 Hercules aircraft will have to be taken out of active duty over the next few months, Lt.-Col. Cooke said.
Although the air force has already done "almost 65%" of the recommended inspections of its Hercules' wings, he said the rest of the inspections could take aircraft out of service for weeks and eat up scarce funds.
"We honestly don't know yet how much it will cost.... It could be in the hundreds of thousands."
The problem of cracked wings was first discovered two years ago in the Canadian Hercules fleet, which is among the oldest in the world.
"The bottom line is that we are now at the point where we either invest significant funds to rebuild the aircraft or we take the same amount and replace the bird with another, new aircraft," Lt.-Col. Cooke said.
I knew that the hot new item in CF circles was to get heavy lift helicopters, but I didn't realize they wanted so many. Makes the retirement of the seven Chinooks in the late '80's, early '90's look a little short sighted, but then military planning and government budgets have a way of cancelling each other out.
Good luck on getting the funding, but it's time for the government to put up or stop flying.
The Chinooks needed to be upgraded to D models for them to be effective.
At least that is what the new buyers did.
-
I have, and while certainly I have no "valid" in side source. Delays are caused by the government wanting to buy the Dash 8.
Now this makes sence someways, Buy Canadian, always good.
But the dash 8 does not have a "herc or Buffalo" style drop door. Something which is an absolute must with search and rescue.
Sure you can do SAR with a Twin Otter to a small degree. but the dang doors are simply too small. It takes too long to load and unload.
There is a reason hercs labs Buffalos, Cormarants have rear loading ramp doors.
They are required for the mission.
If Bombardiair can come up with a ramp Dash 8 in a hurry, great, buy Canadian.
But they dont. Stop the crap and buy a dang plane that does the job.
The Twin Otter was fine for SAR. In fact it was excellent for searching in the mountains and we never had any trouble loading them.
It had the highest serviceability rate in the CF and was an excellent platform for SAR.
Hercs should be used to get on scene quick. Once a search grid was established, Twin Otters were excellent at manouvering through mountain valleys.
Politics.
-
The -4 is an older kit, originally a Mania kit IIRC. The only other 1/48 -4 Corsair out there is the Academy kit, which does have recessed panel lines but that's not a good reason to buy the kit as Academy hosed the fuselage contours. The Hasegawa is about dead-on in shape, it just has raised panel lines. But if you want a halfway accurate -4, that's the price you gotta pay.
Tamiya's Corsairs have recessed panel lines, but they release the -1, -2, -1A and -1D. WWII Corsairs. Hasegawa also has a -5N, -7 and AU-1, all with recessed panel lines, the -5N and AU-1 are appropriate for Korea if that's the era you are interested in.
I scribed my Hasegawa -4 fuselage and used the wing and horizontal stabs from the Academy kit. With a bit of work the wing does work. But it isn't a drop dead fit.
-
That's right all you Torontoians.....Tilt's coming to town!!
I've been spending FAR too many hours behind this confuser, working this past year. I need a break!!!
I still haven't had an opportunity to get to an Air Show (in 2 years.......for shame!!!). So I decided it was time to get out and see the world. I'm going to book a flight to Toronto to go to the Canadian International Air Show (3, 4, & 5 Sept).
I don't know what I'm getting myself in to....but I sure hope to have a great time. Any other ARC'rs going to the show? I'll be set up in the VIP section (thank you Uncle Buca!!!), but I have no idea what to expect. I'm also hoping the Snowbirds will be back up doing there thing at the show.
I don't have Hotel accoms yet, but Buca (CF-18 Demo Pilot - and friend extrodinair) may come to the rescue there as well. He may have a line on a place for me to stay. But what other things should I expect???? You're reading the post of a guy who's never made it past Regina!!!!!!!!! Pretty sad....
Look forward to the reports....
Cheers,
Tilt
Be careful with Buca. He is a beer hound.
-
Sweet, you should put this in the 2Bobs forum.
-
I poured over the wartime photo's we had in our archives and those P-40s definitely had Sutton harnesses.
Scooby, is there anyway I can get access to those photos? They might help me with the IPMS Canada P-40E sheet. Travel isn't a problem for me if that would be required. Thanks.
The Squadron moved to Yellowknife and the albums went with them.
Perhaps I can get some of the photo numbers and you can order the pictures from the photographic unit in Ottawa. It would be cheaper then travelling.
-
I'm confused, someone please help me.
I would like to build a P-40 from 111 Sqn. but I'm not clear which version. IPMS Canada has a sheet for P-40Es(http://www.ipmscanada.com/111teaser.html). But the above thread is leading down the P-40K path. Is there a substatial difference between the E-K?
Cheers
Hey Bear,
Four of the five choices on the IPMS Canada sheet are for Kittyhawk 1As which were P-40Es.
The fifth choice is Boomers aircraft which was a P-40K. His was a later K with the deleted fillet and longer fuselage. The aircraft is also known as a Mk III Kittyhawk.
I think you can use the tail from Hasagawa's N to make a K if you mix and match a E and N kit. But I would wait and see if Hasegawa releases a K.
I also could be wrong about the mix and matching. I need to double check the kits.
Cheers
-
Very nice work Pig!
-
The Snowbirds will be flying the venerable Tutor for a while to come. However nothing would prevent to government allocating in the budget to buy the Hawk in any version availible for the Snowbirds to use. Obviously they would need 12-15 aircraft and a servicing contract to keep them flying. I would also suggest that possibly getting our hands on some lower timed hours used aircraft if that is possible. But in time I can see the budget springing for a dozen or so Hawks, maybe not the most fancy version, but indicative enough to fly the Snowbird colours while showing the citizenry what the Hawk offers in daily training for CF and NFTC.
Don't hold your breath.
When I was based in Edmoton we said the government would never shut down the air part of the base. What did they do?
The government is looking for reasons to shut the Snowbirds down. Even the Hornet fleet isn't safe.
-
If hope there were no injuries.
Does anyone know if there is talk of giving the Snowbirds newer equipment? At some point these things become like the Sea Kings, no?
There has been some talk, but nothing has really progressed. There was talk of using CF-18s, but that would be very expensive. Same thing with the Harvard 2 and the Hawk....both are expensive options...there was even talk that if the Snowbirds went with, say, the Hawk, then the number of aircraft flying in the teams shows would have to be cut nearly in half.
There has also been talk of outright cutting the team all together...which would be a shame, because the Snowbirds are a true Canadian institution....they are Canada in my mind. I hate the thought of losing the team. :unsure:
CF-18 would be very expensive.
The Hawk or Harvard II would be cheap to operate. But we would need corporate sponsorship as we lease those jets for pilot training.
-
I know my former Squadron (440) flew P-40s with the Sutton harness.
We were known as 111 Sqdn in the Aleutians, before we were re-numbered to 440.
I poured over the wartime photo's we had in our archives and those P-40s definitely had Sutton harnesses.
-
Hi Greg,
I find it very interesting how you did the ribs. I received my kit today and it is nowhere near as bad as yours. I only have one seam to fill on the aft fuselage.
I am somewhat surprised no one mentioned the method that I am going to use to fix the ribs. I will mask one rib at a time horizontally along the fuselage. I will then fill the sink mark and fix the problem one rib at a time. I will slowly work my way around the entire circumference of the fuselage.
Going this route will hopefully avoid rounding the fuselage. It will keep an edge on each rib.
-
Everyone waiting for Hadfield. Notice everyone peeking to the left. He was about 10 minutes late, which is a long time when you're standing at attention.
I've yet to be on a parade where the reviewing officer wasn't late. Heck, I wish most of our reviewing officers were only ten minutes late!
We in the Airforce are not as smart as the Army. In the summer we stand on parade in full dress uniform. At least the Army plugs go to short sleave dress uniforms.
I don't understand why the CAF has a short sleave dress uniform. As I have yet to wear it on parade.
I hate parades.
Congrats on your wings!
Question on today's A-320 emergency landing
in Real Aviation
Posted
They certainly won't scrap the aircraft.
They will have an inpsection in the books for that type of landing. Non-destructive testing will be done in certain areas, the gear will be replaced, and the aircraft will go back in service.