The Home of Photos in Dunnunda! Mk I
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
facts win discussions for your enlightenment the Navy Aircraft were T 28 C for carrier famil, though they did not operate off carriers just the land based training strips
Absolutely right Bob Hoover did most of the T 28 test flying which included in test some limited carrier ops to prove the aircraft could operate within the ground training strips and be true to carrier ops.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frigatebird, regarding Aztec. A PPL guy I used to work with used to own an Aztec, was telling me that for a super-short takeoff roll he used to put the gear lever in the up position when in the takeoff roll and when he lifted off the wheels would come straight up and comparatively the aircraft leapt in the air.
One sad day he lifted too much weight off the nose during the early stage of the talked roll, the nose wheel retracted and he had an expensive bulk strip multiplied by two (at full noise of course) plus new props to wrap it up.
Supposedly it was the done thing for kicks in the Aztec going back a few years.
One sad day he lifted too much weight off the nose during the early stage of the talked roll, the nose wheel retracted and he had an expensive bulk strip multiplied by two (at full noise of course) plus new props to wrap it up.
Supposedly it was the done thing for kicks in the Aztec going back a few years.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: WA
Age: 71
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Somewhere between a fake and a replica , I believe 
, but a good one. And the WW1 fulltracker was good, too. I'll post that later. They actually had a mock-up of a V2 rocket, which was apparently destroyed in an "aerial attack" on the Sunday
And the "farmhouse" with attached hangar visible in some shots apparently suffered, as well. All in all, an excellent show. The FW190 replica , sadly, did not fly, as it apparently had a cooling fan fail during Friday run-ups. And the Bristol Freighter couldn't be started on the Saturday, but did run on the Sunday. Pity, I had the video camera on it for quite a while, waiting for that magnificent radial start-up.
I wondered what they were going to do with the Dash-8 (200?) which was parked out on the grass. It did a demo short take-off, very impressive, then a total landing run of 500 ft, on wet grass, without brakes
, according to the commentator.
The attached museum is absolutely brilliant, as anyone who has attended can verify. I only spent 3 hours in there, my wife is very tolerant. Could've spent all day.
I haven't bothered to caption much, as most of the readers on here would know more about the aircraft pictured than I do.
, but a good one. And the WW1 fulltracker was good, too. I'll post that later. They actually had a mock-up of a V2 rocket, which was apparently destroyed in an "aerial attack" on the Sunday And the "farmhouse" with attached hangar visible in some shots apparently suffered, as well. All in all, an excellent show. The FW190 replica , sadly, did not fly, as it apparently had a cooling fan fail during Friday run-ups. And the Bristol Freighter couldn't be started on the Saturday, but did run on the Sunday. Pity, I had the video camera on it for quite a while, waiting for that magnificent radial start-up.I wondered what they were going to do with the Dash-8 (200?) which was parked out on the grass. It did a demo short take-off, very impressive, then a total landing run of 500 ft, on wet grass, without brakes
, according to the commentator. The attached museum is absolutely brilliant, as anyone who has attended can verify. I only spent 3 hours in there, my wife is very tolerant. Could've spent all day.
I haven't bothered to caption much, as most of the readers on here would know more about the aircraft pictured than I do.
Back to T-28s and gear levers.
Very embarrassing, and potentially very expensive, the degree of damage will depend on how hard the ground was!!.
Ain't the first time its happened to the Australian T-28 fleet, it happened at least once before, to a -B at Tyabb.
Doesn't matter what the aircraft is, stick to standard operating procedures and use the bleeding checklist as it was intended, it's a lot cheaper than a cashectomy.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Flying a B, C or D is a bit like flying a 1425HP Chipmunk, flying the A --- and find out the difference. The original T-28A was a USAF basic trainer in Sabre days, and the USAF wanted at trainer that "simulated" the early jets --- including long takeoff runs and shallow climb angles ---- with only 800HP the specification was entirely successful in this regard.
The best version of the T-28 was the Fennec, the French airforce version, the structural changes showed more finesse, compared to a -B, C or D. The Fennec was identical to the NA-260 Nomad, the factory civil version of the T-28. The late Don Kendall's AT-28D-5 actually started life as an NA-260, was repurchased by the DoD and converted to a -D. All Fennec's and quite a few D/D5 theoretically qualify for a standard cat. certificate of airworthiness as an NA-260.
Very embarrassing, and potentially very expensive, the degree of damage will depend on how hard the ground was!!.
Ain't the first time its happened to the Australian T-28 fleet, it happened at least once before, to a -B at Tyabb.
Doesn't matter what the aircraft is, stick to standard operating procedures and use the bleeding checklist as it was intended, it's a lot cheaper than a cashectomy.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Flying a B, C or D is a bit like flying a 1425HP Chipmunk, flying the A --- and find out the difference. The original T-28A was a USAF basic trainer in Sabre days, and the USAF wanted at trainer that "simulated" the early jets --- including long takeoff runs and shallow climb angles ---- with only 800HP the specification was entirely successful in this regard.
The best version of the T-28 was the Fennec, the French airforce version, the structural changes showed more finesse, compared to a -B, C or D. The Fennec was identical to the NA-260 Nomad, the factory civil version of the T-28. The late Don Kendall's AT-28D-5 actually started life as an NA-260, was repurchased by the DoD and converted to a -D. All Fennec's and quite a few D/D5 theoretically qualify for a standard cat. certificate of airworthiness as an NA-260.
"... like flying a 1425 hp Chipmunk", LeadSlead?
The mind boggles.....
The mind boggles.....
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: WA
Age: 71
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caption? ""You want me to do WHAT???"
I wish I had photographed this entire scene--a nurse in mud-spattered whites, driving an opeen-cab Ford field ambulance, pulls up at the aircraft, these soldiers are calling to her: you'd swear they were alive.
The old aero engines can be fascinating--this one had no information attached, still awaiting it's place in the display: appears to be an OHC V8, liquid cooled?