Hi, thanks for this note. I was so hurry that I didn't even notice how I made a grammatical error, I had very short in time before she must go. When she comes back I'll change the Q to CGreetings from Nashville. I flew 6 or 7 different C-47' A/B models (and one C-53 - DC-3A) back in the 80's, flying freight. I think you may have meant to have written "RESCUE' with a 'C'.
HiI hope you achieve your goal of flying the '3'. The DC-4 is even nicer, but I was never a fan of the R-2000 engines. I haven't flown a '3' in many years, but do still operate the same P&W 1830-92 engines on a PBY I have been operating at airshows, etc. for a museum for the past 20 yrs. in my spare time. I was just flying it (and a B-25) weekend before last, at an event at the museum in Virginia Beach.
I hope you achieve your goal of flying the '3'. The DC-4 is even nicer, but I was never a fan of the R-2000 engines. I haven't flown a '3' in many years, but do still operate the same P&W 1830-92 engines on a PBY I have been operating at airshows, etc. for a museum for the past 20 yrs. in my spare time. I was just flying it (and a B-25) weekend before last, at an event at the museum in Virginia Beach.
Hi Burt.....your review of the Aero Irvin with John Lever is what brought me back here. John was the one I PM'd about the Fly Weight. And, I love it.Bob
That’s outstanding . Thanks for posting those. As you can tell from our reactions, we don’t get to exchange thoughts or have conversations often with pilots who have actually “ Been there.. Done that” and you have actually done what most of us here just fantasize about . When did you first become qualified to fly the B-17 and how did that opportunity first present itself ?
Were you a pilot in the military ?
Of all of the aircraft you mentioned which one is your all time favorite to fly and which one presented the most challenges ?
Sorry for all of the questions but this is interesting stuff to most of us .
Cheers
Burt
BobHi Burt.....your review of the Aero Irvin with John Lever is what brought me back here. John was the one I PM'd about the Fly Weight. And, I love it.
No, to the military due to 20/25 eyesight at the time. I had a 'round engine' background due to career patch. Freight with Beech 18, DC-3, etc. Forestry tankers, DC-4, CL-215, and Cl-415, etc. (I'm typed in 5 large flying boats). B-17 was made available while flying B-25's on a ride program (historical flights for the public) and being in the right place at the right time with the same people. I have 2100 hrs. in three 17's.I did a lot of rides/airshows throughout US in my spare time.
All these airplanes are different with their own idiosyncrasies. One could go on for some time. One always enjoys whatever you're in at the moment. Its the challenge of flying them accurately I enjoy.
B-17 is quintessential and fun to share for that reason.I flew Liberty Belle, Movie Memphis Belle, Chuckie, Madras Maiden, Ye Olde Pub. The last three are same airframe with three different names. The 'Pub' looking spectacular. The 17 suffers from poor aileron effectiveness at slower speeds (base and final approach) and wind acts on large rudder surface area requiring upwind throttles to aid in preserving directional control. All electric gear and flaps except cowl flaps and brakes which are hydraulic. All these other airplanes mentioned are typically all hydraulic systems.
B-25 is nicest flying (except DC-4 is best of all). B-25 nosewheel casters +/- 60 deg and is challenging to taxi. Brakes are very effective and require getting used too. On departure roll, float the nose wheel at 85/90 lift off at 120 and accelerate to 160. Between 120 and 145 suffers from inadequate rudder authority to preclude resultant yaw (and subsequent roll) should a catastrophic engine failure occur. So one accelerates rapidly thru 145 (Vmc) to Vy (160) since this is area requires a power reduction in concert with full rudder an effort preclude yaw and roll should a failure occur in this speed region.
PBY(5A) was designed as a straight flying boat utilizing waterways. The landing gear is an afterthought and is archaic. I wrote a short piece in Warbirds Int'l (Nov./Dec. 2011 vol. 30. no.8) about the Military Aviation Museums PBY entitled 'From The Cockpit'. Hydrodynamically is poor on the water compared to even an Albatross, let alone the Canadiar's. Poorly harmonized controls in flight. Lightest in pitch, heavier in roll, (1400 sq. ft. of wing is a large damping moment) and very heavy about the vertical axis (yaw). When rolling into a turn, it's a long moment arm out to the centerline of induced drag of the downward deflected aileron causing significant adverse yaw requiring significant rudder pressure. But therein lies the challenge of flying it accurately. Rolling in and out of turns in airshows is hard work and can where you out quickly. Floats extended noticeably compromises aileron authority. And, when level 8 to 10 knots of speed is lost. Executing steep turns with floats extended while preserving altitude can place you close to the critical alpha.
Oh and DC-3.... The airplane has a 15.5 deg. outer panel wing sweepback causing the stall to occur at the tips and propagate inward causing loss of aileron effectiveness. Moreover, the disturbed airflow at the tips is outside the span of the horizontal stab. so no aerodynamic buffet is felt prior to the stall. Otherwise, a decent airplane.
All these old airplanes have no stall warning systems.
Thats a very quick and dirty. Thanks for the review of the Aero and Eastman lightweight Irvins!
Cheers,
Bob
View attachment 80957
View attachment 80956
View attachment 80955
View attachment 80954
View attachment 80953
View attachment 80952
Hi Burt.....your review of the Aero Irvin with John Lever is what brought me back here. John was the one I PM'd about the Fly Weight. And, I love it.
No, to the military due to 20/25 eyesight at the time. I had a 'round engine' background due to career patch. Freight with Beech 18, DC-3, etc. Forestry tankers, DC-4, CL-215, and Cl-415, etc. (I'm typed in 5 large flying boats). B-17 was made available while flying B-25's on a ride program (historical flights for the public) and being in the right place at the right time with the same people. I have 2100 hrs. in three 17's.I did a lot of rides/airshows throughout US in my spare time.
All these airplanes are different with their own idiosyncrasies. One could go on for some time. One always enjoys whatever you're in at the moment. Its the challenge of flying them accurately I enjoy.
B-17 is quintessential and fun to share for that reason.I flew Liberty Belle, Movie Memphis Belle, Chuckie, Madras Maiden, Ye Olde Pub. The last three are same airframe with three different names. The 'Pub' looking spectacular. The 17 suffers from poor aileron effectiveness at slower speeds (base and final approach) and wind acts on large rudder surface area requiring upwind throttles to aid in preserving directional control. All electric gear and flaps except cowl flaps and brakes which are hydraulic. All these other airplanes mentioned are typically all hydraulic systems.
B-25 is nicest flying (except DC-4 is best of all). B-25 nosewheel casters +/- 60 deg and is challenging to taxi. Brakes are very effective and require getting used too. On departure roll, float the nose wheel at 85/90 lift off at 120 and accelerate to 160. Between 120 and 145 suffers from inadequate rudder authority to preclude resultant yaw (and subsequent roll) should a catastrophic engine failure occur. So one accelerates rapidly thru 145 (Vmc) to Vy (160) since this is area requires a power reduction in concert with full rudder an effort preclude yaw and roll should a failure occur in this speed region.
PBY(5A) was designed as a straight flying boat utilizing waterways. The landing gear is an afterthought and is archaic. I wrote a short piece in Warbirds Int'l (Nov./Dec. 2011 vol. 30. no.8) about the Military Aviation Museums PBY entitled 'From The Cockpit'. Hydrodynamically is poor on the water compared to even an Albatross, let alone the Canadiar's. Poorly harmonized controls in flight. Lightest in pitch, heavier in roll, (1400 sq. ft. of wing is a large damping moment) and very heavy about the vertical axis (yaw). When rolling into a turn, it's a long moment arm out to the centerline of induced drag of the downward deflected aileron causing significant adverse yaw requiring significant rudder pressure. But therein lies the challenge of flying it accurately. Rolling in and out of turns in airshows is hard work and can where you out quickly. Floats extended noticeably compromises aileron authority. And, when level 8 to 10 knots of speed is lost. Executing steep turns with floats extended while preserving altitude can place you close to the critical alpha.
Oh and DC-3.... The airplane has a 15.5 deg. outer panel wing sweepback causing the stall to occur at the tips and propagate inward causing loss of aileron effectiveness. Moreover, the disturbed airflow at the tips is outside the span of the horizontal stab. so no aerodynamic buffet is felt prior to the stall. Otherwise, a decent airplane.
All these old airplanes have no stall warning systems.
Thats a very quick and dirty. Thanks for the review of the Aero and Eastman lightweight Irvins!
Cheers,
Bob
View attachment 80957
View attachment 80956
View attachment 80955
View attachment 80954
View attachment 80953
View attachment 80952
Indeed, none of those airplanes have any stall warning systems. Just ones own sense of proprioception and awareness.Bob, thanks for the detailed answer. It was very interesting to read about Catalina for me.
I also didn't know that the B-17 also didn't have a stall warning.
We're so used to these efficient systems today that it seems like they've always been around.
I can imagine how difficult to fly this old big birds during the show.
Whole lot of awesome compressed into one post. Thank you. Look forward to seeing and hearing from you...Greetings all.....I tend not to hang out in forums and typically would join one to gather information about something I'm interested in learning about or acquiring. Primarily, because I don't have time. With respect to this one, I recently began receiving notifications of postings and picked up on the C-47 thread. In more recent times I visited here (and Fedora) and PM''d a member about the Eastman Fly Weight Irvin after he posted a review. I now have one. That said, I'll place my 2011 Eastman BOB Irvin (44) up somewhere before long. It's never left the house.
Airplanes....I haven't flown a DC-3 in a long time and would simply need to get recurrent (study manuals and fly in type) . I have flown six B-25's over the years. Three B-17's (Liberty Foundation's ride program. I'm one of the original pilots) , a half dozen PBY's, etc. I have been flying at The Military Aviation Museum for 20 yrs this year. While there are many clips on YT people share over the years, here's some I am familiar with.
(sadly my copilot during this one passed away from Covid last year)
(the best Cat footage starting about 6:38)
Cheers,
Bob
Greetings all.....I tend not to hang out in forums and typically would join one to gather information about something I'm interested in learning about or acquiring. Primarily, because I don't have time. With respect to this one, I recently began receiving notifications of postings and picked up on the C-47 thread. In more recent times I visited here (and Fedora) and PM''d a member about the Eastman Fly Weight Irvin after he posted a review. I now have one. That said, I'll place my 2011 Eastman BOB Irvin (44) up somewhere before long. It's never left the house.
Airplanes....I haven't flown a DC-3 in a long time and would simply need to get recurrent (study manuals and fly in type) . I have flown six B-25's over the years. Three B-17's (Liberty Foundation's ride program. I'm one of the original pilots) , a half dozen PBY's, etc. I have been flying at The Military Aviation Museum for 20 yrs this year. While there are many clips on YT people share over the years, here's some I am familiar with.
(sadly my copilot during this one passed away from Covid last year)
(the best Cat footage starting about 6:38)
Cheers,
Bob