Was the Nomad really that bad?
Jas - excellent point. Why do we do this in Australia?
Countries of similar or smaller size produce excellent aircraft and do so profitably.
Canada = Bombardier and Viking,
Switzerland = Pilatus,
Sweden = Saab.
The Czech 's are getting into what seems a great market with a smart product in the Evector.
With the demise of avgas and a massive market that never disappeared and is getting bigger (tourist operations, rough strip, third-world, and parcel express to small communities) there is plenty of money to be made with a rugged and practical product. Look at the success Kodiak has had and the Caravan just keeps on keeping on.
With some sound financial backing plus decent engines and tweaks of the troublesome components, the Nomad must be a great shortcut for any savvy producer to leap into the market without the hassle of initial design and certification.
Slick rebranding and a glossy 2020's livery would see this aircraft take up where it left off and do way, way more. Without hopeless government interference and that Aussie knock-everything-we-do mentality, there is no reason the Nomad couldn't enjoy a huge resurgence.
Countries of similar or smaller size produce excellent aircraft and do so profitably.
Canada = Bombardier and Viking,
Switzerland = Pilatus,
Sweden = Saab.
The Czech 's are getting into what seems a great market with a smart product in the Evector.
With the demise of avgas and a massive market that never disappeared and is getting bigger (tourist operations, rough strip, third-world, and parcel express to small communities) there is plenty of money to be made with a rugged and practical product. Look at the success Kodiak has had and the Caravan just keeps on keeping on.
With some sound financial backing plus decent engines and tweaks of the troublesome components, the Nomad must be a great shortcut for any savvy producer to leap into the market without the hassle of initial design and certification.
Slick rebranding and a glossy 2020's livery would see this aircraft take up where it left off and do way, way more. Without hopeless government interference and that Aussie knock-everything-we-do mentality, there is no reason the Nomad couldn't enjoy a huge resurgence.
Plus with the right paint-scheme I reckon she was a pretty cool looking beast.
Photos: GAF N-22B Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Photos: GAF N-22B Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Great Vis: Photos: GAF N-24A Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Not a particularly flattering livery but a great photo: Photos: GAF N-24A Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Photos: GAF N-22B Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Photos: GAF N-22B Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Great Vis: Photos: GAF N-24A Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Not a particularly flattering livery but a great photo: Photos: GAF N-24A Nomad Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
I'll give it to you straight, GregP: I don't think the ADF's use of the Nomad took proper account of the configuration, role and environment in which the ADF used the aircraft, compared with the design assumptions.
That's not to say it wasn't a great aircraft. But any great aircraft can be turned into something else if it's used in configurations, roles or environments that weren't taken account of in the original design assumptions and instructions for continuing airworthiness.
That's not to say it wasn't a great aircraft. But any great aircraft can be turned into something else if it's used in configurations, roles or environments that weren't taken account of in the original design assumptions and instructions for continuing airworthiness.
Jaz; As we used to say at HdH (and probably CAC and GAF efore) in regard to Australian product; who wants a posting to Fishermans Bend or Bankstown? If they buy overseas there is a lovely posting for a few years to St Louis, Seattle, Los Angeles, Toulouse or London and suchlike.
Zero qualifications and no knowledge, Greg. Just wild speculation that the original design and ICA were based on assumptions about the typical mission profile in which the aircraft would be engaged, and more wild speculation that the ADF actually engaged the aircraft in missions that involved much, much more TIS in turbulence and higher G manoeuvring (as a consequence of more low level operations) than was assumed in the design and ICA.
But as I say: just wild speculation.
But as I say: just wild speculation.
GregP
Wasn't there an issue with the published flap extension speed not incorporating a safety factor, resulting in near-death experience at Tindal in the late 80's/early 90's.
Wasn't there an issue with the published flap extension speed not incorporating a safety factor, resulting in near-death experience at Tindal in the late 80's/early 90's.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Tindal 'incident' was reviewed as part of the A303 Inquiry and was revealed to be a sham along with one (or two?) other false reports of alleged 'misadventure' at Mt.Isa.
I would also wildly speculate that the typical mission in which the Flying Doctor engaged the aircraft was different than the typical mission in which the ADF engaged the aircraft, and that the latter put the airframe under substantially more stresses than the former.
But again, mere wild speculation.
Do you have any facts to show that the aircraft design and ICA took into consideration the configurations, roles and environments in which the ADF actually used the aircraft? What do you say was/were the likely cause/s of the in flight tailplane failures?
But again, mere wild speculation.
Do you have any facts to show that the aircraft design and ICA took into consideration the configurations, roles and environments in which the ADF actually used the aircraft? What do you say was/were the likely cause/s of the in flight tailplane failures?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More 'wild speculation' ... for goodness sake man. And just who do you think would be privy to the kind of design data you're referring to? Try getting that sort of material out of Boeing or Airbus for example .. you're not serious surely??
As to tail plane failures, there was only one: As i explained above, the one which crashed while in DSTO custody was due to the organization which had prior custody of the aircraft not carrying out a mandatory inspection before hand-over which would have discovered a stabilator spar crack for which there was an available repair kit waiting on the shelf.
End of 'speculation' ... thank you.
As to tail plane failures, there was only one: As i explained above, the one which crashed while in DSTO custody was due to the organization which had prior custody of the aircraft not carrying out a mandatory inspection before hand-over which would have discovered a stabilator spar crack for which there was an available repair kit waiting on the shelf.
End of 'speculation' ... thank you.
172 Nomads were built.
In an ABC '7-30 Report' on 27 Jul 04, it was reported that 19 aircraft had crashed with 56 deaths.
Not a particularly good record of safety.
In an ABC '7-30 Report' on 27 Jul 04, it was reported that 19 aircraft had crashed with 56 deaths.
Not a particularly good record of safety.
GregP,
As you well know, the Nomad was manufactured by a Federal Government owned aerospace manufacturer: GAF which later became ASTA.
So I'm surprised that you, as a government employed investigator, were not privy to the kind of design data Lead Balloon refers to.
Did you ask for it?
As you well know, the Nomad was manufactured by a Federal Government owned aerospace manufacturer: GAF which later became ASTA.
So I'm surprised that you, as a government employed investigator, were not privy to the kind of design data Lead Balloon refers to.
Did you ask for it?
Moderator
due to the organization which had prior custody of the aircraft not carrying out a mandatory inspection before hand-over which would have discovered a stabilator spar crack
A long time ago and the memory may be a tad deficient .. I don't recall that that was the case (a good mate did the last inspection prior and he was a bit of a stickler for detail) and, if my recollection be correct, there was a subsequent inspection which was deferred ?
djpil's recollections may be better than mine ...
A long time ago and the memory may be a tad deficient .. I don't recall that that was the case (a good mate did the last inspection prior and he was a bit of a stickler for detail) and, if my recollection be correct, there was a subsequent inspection which was deferred ?
djpil's recollections may be better than mine ...
And just who do you think would be privy to the kind of design data you're referring to?
Moderator
That doesn't suggest the inspection either was overlooked or incompetent ? Indeed, even years later, he would agonise over a coffee as to whether he could have missed something in the nature of a crack in its embryonic development .. lovely fellow and a fine tech.