Grounding of DC3's
Bring back the Dak!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding Chuks post#32, it is exactly for the reasons you elucidate that no "modern-trained" low-houred pilot will ever be let any where near a DC-3 command, because it DOES require training quite discrete in nature and a good handful of hours subsequent to that, during which hopefully the beast will bare its teeth, but not bite too hard, and it's an endangered species anyway.
I was a very busy UK TRE in the mid-seventies on the Dak, and yes, EFATO's taught properly do require a deal of old-fashioned flying skills and physical strength, but teach we did, and we never had an accident.
Highlight of all this was briefing what exactly happens when the tail comes up on takeoff to some furloughed Hamble cadets. They took it all in, but had already been told they were the best, so when the dear old lady swung hard left on each and every one of them, and I took over and deftly (luckily) managed to leave all the runway edge-lights intact, she had already done half my job for me. They all went on to become really good handlers, but never forgot that first lesson.
I have never worked for Air Atlantique, but rather alongside them in the early days. In my last job I had the pleasure of flying with some of the products of their training system, and our company has always held that AA's training and their pilot product is second to none--quite an accolade from such a large organisation. This bodes well, I would have thought, for their safety case.
So, if your AA DC-3 Captain does not have grey hair and a worldly wizened look, rest assured that he/she has still well and truly earned their wings in the best and most appropriate way possible.
We used to carry 36 pax, all their holiday bags, (no notional limit), and had carpets and overhead racks and a galley. AA have dispensed with a lot of that, so fly them lighter, thus adding to the safety margins. (And yes, I have flown ALL their 3's in a previous life!).
I would like to see them grounded ONLY if there were far more compelling arguments presented than those already mentioned. I would like to see them continue to fly passengers IF AA's management really believe, in their heart of hearts, that this is what they want to happen.
Good Luck to all involved. It is still far and away my favourite aeroplane.
I was a very busy UK TRE in the mid-seventies on the Dak, and yes, EFATO's taught properly do require a deal of old-fashioned flying skills and physical strength, but teach we did, and we never had an accident.
Highlight of all this was briefing what exactly happens when the tail comes up on takeoff to some furloughed Hamble cadets. They took it all in, but had already been told they were the best, so when the dear old lady swung hard left on each and every one of them, and I took over and deftly (luckily) managed to leave all the runway edge-lights intact, she had already done half my job for me. They all went on to become really good handlers, but never forgot that first lesson.
I have never worked for Air Atlantique, but rather alongside them in the early days. In my last job I had the pleasure of flying with some of the products of their training system, and our company has always held that AA's training and their pilot product is second to none--quite an accolade from such a large organisation. This bodes well, I would have thought, for their safety case.
So, if your AA DC-3 Captain does not have grey hair and a worldly wizened look, rest assured that he/she has still well and truly earned their wings in the best and most appropriate way possible.
We used to carry 36 pax, all their holiday bags, (no notional limit), and had carpets and overhead racks and a galley. AA have dispensed with a lot of that, so fly them lighter, thus adding to the safety margins. (And yes, I have flown ALL their 3's in a previous life!).
I would like to see them grounded ONLY if there were far more compelling arguments presented than those already mentioned. I would like to see them continue to fly passengers IF AA's management really believe, in their heart of hearts, that this is what they want to happen.
Good Luck to all involved. It is still far and away my favourite aeroplane.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tail-draggers, ah!
I was privileged to participate in operating a DC-3 as a sort of human auto-pilot. The Captain just engaged me for climb, cruise and descent so that he could burn his way through a pack of 20 while sucking down a half-gallon of Navy-strength coffee.
I would have liked to fly the beast, just not for that particular operator, so that I only filled in now and then from my regular job flying modern light twins. There was no point in doing a conversion, unfortunately.
The high point was the intro, when I was taken for a wuss and told to do a full-breaking stall. I had been bleating about rules, regulations and all that sort of thing so that my boss must have been expecting me to let go at the buffet. Next thing you know we were knife-edge over the Everglades, when I thought to myself, "Is this why they invented stall breaker strips?"
At least you could not complain about the ergonomics of the cockpit, because there was none of that. Those two almost identical handles for gear and flaps back behind you, plus that stupid little gear latch. Get it wrong and you wreck the up-lock. Who would ever approve such a thing nowadays?
I had some doubts about the condition of ours, which we nicknamed the Greasy 3. That was because we used to tip 5 gallons of oil into each engine after about two hours of flight. Surely they weren't all like that?
I used to think of the DC-3 when I was flying a modern 32-seat jet, thinking of all the mechanical palaver we went through in the DC-3 to do the same amount of work.
I am not real big on nostalgia but there was one thing... I went up front to look at the cockpit of an old Caravelle once, just out of curiousity. The smell of old leather, H-5606 hydraulic fluid, sweat and a very light overtone of airsick made me think immediately of the DC-3. You knew people had been hard at work in there! New airplanes don't have anything like that, do they?
I would have liked to fly the beast, just not for that particular operator, so that I only filled in now and then from my regular job flying modern light twins. There was no point in doing a conversion, unfortunately.
The high point was the intro, when I was taken for a wuss and told to do a full-breaking stall. I had been bleating about rules, regulations and all that sort of thing so that my boss must have been expecting me to let go at the buffet. Next thing you know we were knife-edge over the Everglades, when I thought to myself, "Is this why they invented stall breaker strips?"
At least you could not complain about the ergonomics of the cockpit, because there was none of that. Those two almost identical handles for gear and flaps back behind you, plus that stupid little gear latch. Get it wrong and you wreck the up-lock. Who would ever approve such a thing nowadays?
I had some doubts about the condition of ours, which we nicknamed the Greasy 3. That was because we used to tip 5 gallons of oil into each engine after about two hours of flight. Surely they weren't all like that?
I used to think of the DC-3 when I was flying a modern 32-seat jet, thinking of all the mechanical palaver we went through in the DC-3 to do the same amount of work.
I am not real big on nostalgia but there was one thing... I went up front to look at the cockpit of an old Caravelle once, just out of curiousity. The smell of old leather, H-5606 hydraulic fluid, sweat and a very light overtone of airsick made me think immediately of the DC-3. You knew people had been hard at work in there! New airplanes don't have anything like that, do they?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DC3 is a pilots airplane, it is also a very easy to fly tail wheel machine.
Now if you want a challenge when it comes to airplane handling you should try the PBY.
Now if you want a challenge when it comes to airplane handling you should try the PBY.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Route for change...?
Make the Company a charity and all flights are free to those who donate a minimum of £x (the price of a ticket) to the charity. The company can then meet its costs out of the charity. Is that possible? There would then be no fare paying passengers. Surely thay cannot stop all such aircraft. What about the pleasure flights in the DH89 Rapide (in which I made my first flight as a schoolboy in 1951 from the North side of Heathrow) Probably too simple an idea.
Funny how the EU can turn a blind eye to those high time B737 carrying passengers, Russian aircraft being used on night freight contracts, but an old aircraft being used for joyrides at an airshow we will have to put an end to this.
Why would you need to install oxygen breathing equipment in a non- pressurised aircraft, when a fire-axe through the cockpit window and open the cargo door will dispense of any smoke, why the need to have slides installed?
How many people have been killed in DC-3/C-47 joyflights in the last 50 years?
Whats next the BBMF Lancaster banned from flying to and particpating in airshows?
Perhaps the next step for the EU would be to ban Beagles,Tiger Moths, Chipmunks and Britten-Norman Islanders from flying unless they comply with the latest EU aviation Regulations. You may need to install a 10g compliant seat in your DH-82, a glass cockpit in your DHC-1, and the list goes on.
Why have Communism when the EU can be so much more fun.
Why would you need to install oxygen breathing equipment in a non- pressurised aircraft, when a fire-axe through the cockpit window and open the cargo door will dispense of any smoke, why the need to have slides installed?
How many people have been killed in DC-3/C-47 joyflights in the last 50 years?
Whats next the BBMF Lancaster banned from flying to and particpating in airshows?
Perhaps the next step for the EU would be to ban Beagles,Tiger Moths, Chipmunks and Britten-Norman Islanders from flying unless they comply with the latest EU aviation Regulations. You may need to install a 10g compliant seat in your DH-82, a glass cockpit in your DHC-1, and the list goes on.
Why have Communism when the EU can be so much more fun.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the problem, but...
what is the solution? Regulators probably without a clue about what they are regulating can create a big mess for sure. Even if they are not pig-ignorant they certainly do not have any nostalgia for this or that aircraft; they are in the business of ensuring some unrealistic level of safety for Joe Public.
There was a famous story about an FAA ramp inspector writing up a Navajo light twin for having "bent propeller tips." Some jokers had pointed him to the aircraft, which happened to be fitted with a new design of prop that was built that way on purpose, when he just whipped out his biro and blazed away with his brain in neutral. It confirmed our opinion of the then-FAA!
We are just peeing into a steady breeze here, given that people in general now expect to be protected from themselves in all regards.
You seriously expect that someone of average intelligence is able to look at an aircraft that is probably more than 60 years old, given that most DC-3s were produced between 1942 and 1945 for use in the Second World War, and fully understand that he is not going to enjoy anything like a modern level of safety? Sad to say, he's been carefully raised, like a battery hen, to go through life not using his native intelligence in that way.
I have been amused by various questions from people I meet when they learn that I am a pilot. The best was a German who asked me why I didn't want to become "a professional pilot." When I asked him what he meant by that he told me perhaps I should think about trying to find a job with Lufthansa.
I just shrugged and told him that meant that I would have to get a licence and all... too much trouble. He shrugged and agreed with that.
How far do you think I could get with someone like that trying to explain the certification standards of 1932 compared to those now in force? About 1.5 sentences into it the poor guy's eyes would roll back to show white.
The DC-3 looks like everyone's favourite uncle, somehow. Slightly shabby but friendly in appearance, who would guess that Uncle has a real mean streak? You could even call him homicidal when treated badly. Lose one engine on takeoff and find, perhaps, that your 65 year-old prop feathering system has pooped out, well, your nostalgia passengers are going to get a lot more than they paid for and never mind whatever you think you can do about that!
I don't much like tourists anyway. To find myself in the front of a -3 with a load of rich ones sat there behind me... I need this in my life? Full marks to someone brave enough to want to do that sort of thing in the face of regulatory opposition; it is an ugly job but someone has to do it. Just not me!
There was a famous story about an FAA ramp inspector writing up a Navajo light twin for having "bent propeller tips." Some jokers had pointed him to the aircraft, which happened to be fitted with a new design of prop that was built that way on purpose, when he just whipped out his biro and blazed away with his brain in neutral. It confirmed our opinion of the then-FAA!
We are just peeing into a steady breeze here, given that people in general now expect to be protected from themselves in all regards.
You seriously expect that someone of average intelligence is able to look at an aircraft that is probably more than 60 years old, given that most DC-3s were produced between 1942 and 1945 for use in the Second World War, and fully understand that he is not going to enjoy anything like a modern level of safety? Sad to say, he's been carefully raised, like a battery hen, to go through life not using his native intelligence in that way.
I have been amused by various questions from people I meet when they learn that I am a pilot. The best was a German who asked me why I didn't want to become "a professional pilot." When I asked him what he meant by that he told me perhaps I should think about trying to find a job with Lufthansa.
I just shrugged and told him that meant that I would have to get a licence and all... too much trouble. He shrugged and agreed with that.
How far do you think I could get with someone like that trying to explain the certification standards of 1932 compared to those now in force? About 1.5 sentences into it the poor guy's eyes would roll back to show white.
The DC-3 looks like everyone's favourite uncle, somehow. Slightly shabby but friendly in appearance, who would guess that Uncle has a real mean streak? You could even call him homicidal when treated badly. Lose one engine on takeoff and find, perhaps, that your 65 year-old prop feathering system has pooped out, well, your nostalgia passengers are going to get a lot more than they paid for and never mind whatever you think you can do about that!
I don't much like tourists anyway. To find myself in the front of a -3 with a load of rich ones sat there behind me... I need this in my life? Full marks to someone brave enough to want to do that sort of thing in the face of regulatory opposition; it is an ugly job but someone has to do it. Just not me!
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: U.K.
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Better Off Out
Marhubeng we would get out of the EU if any political party would give us a choice. We want a referendum on the constitution, or the Reform Treaty, as it is now known. 85 per cent say they want a referendum but Scotch Brown will not give us one. However, do not despair, Marhubeng, Britain will leave the EU at some stage. The sooner the better for most of us, although you would never beliweve it if you only watch the BBC.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Doue la Fontaine, France
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just don't forget to lock the tailwheel for takeoff - and unlock it before taxying. There ain't no warning lights!
It was a pilot's airplane - not a computer.
It was a pilot's airplane - not a computer.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England.
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give all these morons who come up with these ideas double their salry with the understanding they never ever again show up for work.
I can see them now, waving their expense account applications in triumph and sharing jokes about how easy it is to con the gullible public in a "democratic" society.
The gullible public who are footing the bill, through taxation, for all this incompetence, waste and daylight robbery.
G Brown must envy their ability to waste and steal more public money than even he can.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: W Sussex
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DC3
It strikes me that we have just lost another historic marque to the whim of 
Yurp! Do you really need all sorts of flash kit for what Air Atlantique do? And havent BBMF got a Dak for running around in?
Yurp! Do you really need all sorts of flash kit for what Air Atlantique do? And havent BBMF got a Dak for running around in?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Guernsey
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was learning to fly I went round Air Antiques operation at CVT. Fascinating! Got a flight on a D.Rapide and a flight from CVT on a DC-3 to EMA with a low approach and go-around. Just brilliant. Real shame they have to go.
However, what's the betting that somewhere within the EU these birds carry on flying? Isn't this just another example of G.Brown et al taking EU legislation and gold plating it at the expense both financially and culturally of the British public?!
However, what's the betting that somewhere within the EU these birds carry on flying? Isn't this just another example of G.Brown et al taking EU legislation and gold plating it at the expense both financially and culturally of the British public?!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lose one engine on takeoff and find, perhaps, that your 65 year-old prop feathering system has pooped out,
Propellers have maximum times that require them to be overhauled and re-certified.
I have flown these engines and propellers on the DC3 and PBY for around 10,000 hours and never had one fail mechanically....had a few prop governors and feathering motors fail but the airplanes were still controllable and flyable.
By the way an engine failure on take off is not an automatic crash, I have had it happen twice on these types of airplanes and managed to control the things to a safe landing.
Propellers have maximum times that require them to be overhauled and re-certified.
I have flown these engines and propellers on the DC3 and PBY for around 10,000 hours and never had one fail mechanically....had a few prop governors and feathering motors fail but the airplanes were still controllable and flyable.
By the way an engine failure on take off is not an automatic crash, I have had it happen twice on these types of airplanes and managed to control the things to a safe landing.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ireland
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's nice to keep old aircraft flying but I would not like to suffer the sad fate of the firefighters whose ageing Hercules came asunder in midair in 1994, and another in 2002. Or the crew of the Consolidated Vultee Privateer bomber which was built in 1944 and again, was converted to a firefighter. It was 58 years old when its left wing separated killing both pilots. What about the ancient Mallard amphibian whose wings collapsed shortly after take-off in Flordia a year or so back? All the fare paying passengers aboard were killed along with the crew.
Under the latest FAA proposals, an operator is obliged to start treating his aircraft as ageing when it may be as little as 11 years old. So it's a bit silly to say that the EU is ruining flying.
Under the latest FAA proposals, an operator is obliged to start treating his aircraft as ageing when it may be as little as 11 years old. So it's a bit silly to say that the EU is ruining flying.
Quote from chuks:
The DC-3 looks like everyone's favourite uncle, somehow. Slightly shabby but friendly in appearance, who would guess that Uncle has a real mean streak? You could even call him homicidal when treated badly. Lose one engine on takeoff and find, perhaps, that your 65 year-old prop feathering system has pooped out, well, your nostalgia passengers are going to get a lot more than they paid for and never mind whatever you think you can do about that!
[Unquote]
You seem to be a bit ambivolent about flying pax in Dax, while loving the beast? I've only 450 hrs P2 on them, and that was 40 years ago, but have enjoyed many of the contributions - yours included.
Guess this is thread-creep, but presume you still exercise the CSUs and check the feathering pumps before take-off ? Remember once having to shut an engine down because the feathering-pump relay stuck closed (ON) during the check. The prop continued to feather and unfeather until we shut the other engine down AND turned the battery master off... But the check did pick up the fault before we got airborne.
Can you imagine doing such a complex procedure on a current jet? The Dak - perhaps the most benign of its era - certainly can bite in various areas, and should always have at least one experienced vintage operator in the cockpit. As a rookie, my own learning curve was fairly steep. For example, I discovered that, if you pick the wrong time to use the deicing boots, it's possible to pick up so much ice that she will not maintain even 3000 ft (empty) at climb power.
But even the latest kit can spring surprises...
The DC-3 looks like everyone's favourite uncle, somehow. Slightly shabby but friendly in appearance, who would guess that Uncle has a real mean streak? You could even call him homicidal when treated badly. Lose one engine on takeoff and find, perhaps, that your 65 year-old prop feathering system has pooped out, well, your nostalgia passengers are going to get a lot more than they paid for and never mind whatever you think you can do about that!
[Unquote]
You seem to be a bit ambivolent about flying pax in Dax, while loving the beast? I've only 450 hrs P2 on them, and that was 40 years ago, but have enjoyed many of the contributions - yours included.
Guess this is thread-creep, but presume you still exercise the CSUs and check the feathering pumps before take-off ? Remember once having to shut an engine down because the feathering-pump relay stuck closed (ON) during the check. The prop continued to feather and unfeather until we shut the other engine down AND turned the battery master off... But the check did pick up the fault before we got airborne.
Can you imagine doing such a complex procedure on a current jet? The Dak - perhaps the most benign of its era - certainly can bite in various areas, and should always have at least one experienced vintage operator in the cockpit. As a rookie, my own learning curve was fairly steep. For example, I discovered that, if you pick the wrong time to use the deicing boots, it's possible to pick up so much ice that she will not maintain even 3000 ft (empty) at climb power.
But even the latest kit can spring surprises...
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's nice to keep old aircraft flying but I would not like to suffer the sad fate of the firefighters whose ageing ....what about the ancient Mallard amphibian whose wings collapsed shortly after take-off in Flordia a year or so back? All the fare paying passengers aboard were killed along with the crew.
This is not about ensuring the ongoing airworthiness of the aircraft in terms of structure or engines, this is about adding highly expensive and impractical items to the airframe, which are pretty much irrelevant when operating 25 minute pleasure flights on nice days at airshows.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that what we have here is the usual half-researched, EU scare story nonsense written by semi-comatose journos who can't be bothered to leave the bar long enough to check the facts.
These are the same breed of cretin that told us the EU was going to ban bananas if they were too straight, ban British chocolate because it was not chocolatey enough and ban British sausages (some newspapers actually picked that one up from Yes Minister).
Let's wait and see what ACTUALLY happens - I suspect that the legislation (like that applied to car emissions) can't/won't be applied retrospectively to aeroplanes like the DC3.
Air Antique are trying to flog their classic flight (or were) - maybe this is a convenient excuse for grounding increasingly expensive DC3s.
These are the same breed of cretin that told us the EU was going to ban bananas if they were too straight, ban British chocolate because it was not chocolatey enough and ban British sausages (some newspapers actually picked that one up from Yes Minister).
Let's wait and see what ACTUALLY happens - I suspect that the legislation (like that applied to car emissions) can't/won't be applied retrospectively to aeroplanes like the DC3.
Air Antique are trying to flog their classic flight (or were) - maybe this is a convenient excuse for grounding increasingly expensive DC3s.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
