TAA and Ansett Convair 440's. Question.
Thread Starter
TAA and Ansett Convair 440's. Question.
The recent acquisition by HARS of a Convair 440 painted in TAA colours made me wonder if TAA and Ansett Convair 440's came equipped with airborne weather radar.
The RAAF had two Convair 440's in the Sixties. One with a blunt nose had no radar and used to get beaten up by Cb's. The second Convair thankfully had radar (hence the longer nose).
I recall that after the Ansett Viscount crash into Botany Bay in 1961 after a thunderstorm penetration (that Viscount did not have radar) DCA mandated all turbine equipped passenger airliners must be fitted with weather radar(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansett-ANA_Flight_325
Were the TAA and Ansett CV 440's equipped with radar?
The RAAF had two Convair 440's in the Sixties. One with a blunt nose had no radar and used to get beaten up by Cb's. The second Convair thankfully had radar (hence the longer nose).
I recall that after the Ansett Viscount crash into Botany Bay in 1961 after a thunderstorm penetration (that Viscount did not have radar) DCA mandated all turbine equipped passenger airliners must be fitted with weather radar(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansett-ANA_Flight_325
Were the TAA and Ansett CV 440's equipped with radar?
TAA operated the Convair 240.
Ansett operated the 340 and the 440.
The last airline Convairs were the two 440s operated by Airlines of SA and neither had weather radar when retired in 1973.
As for the two RAAF aeroplanes, I can't find a photo of A96-313 with radar and I can't find a photo of A96-353 without radar. This surprises me but Centaurus should know as he was the last person in the RAAF to fly both aeroplanes.
Rgds
Ansett operated the 340 and the 440.
The last airline Convairs were the two 440s operated by Airlines of SA and neither had weather radar when retired in 1973.
As for the two RAAF aeroplanes, I can't find a photo of A96-313 with radar and I can't find a photo of A96-353 without radar. This surprises me but Centaurus should know as he was the last person in the RAAF to fly both aeroplanes.
Rgds
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From all of the above, maybe HARS should consider changing their current Convair TAA colour scheme to that of the RAAF A96-353 since the RAAF machine was apparently the only Convair in Australia that had the weather radar nose extension. I am sure the RAAF would not disagree.
I suspect that HARS might have spent a lot of money painting it in TAA colours. Given that the aeroplane has no Australian history, the opportunity is there to vary the colour scheme as the aircraft needs repainting in the future.
No very happy for it to stay in the TAA colours!
Not much in the way of representation of Trans Australia Airlines in the skies these days as it seems annoyingly to have faded somewhat from public conscience. This aircraft looks magnificent in those colours. Well done HARS.
Not much in the way of representation of Trans Australia Airlines in the skies these days as it seems annoyingly to have faded somewhat from public conscience. This aircraft looks magnificent in those colours. Well done HARS.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No criticism to HARS but of late HARS has tended towards a lot of military hardware and history. This is a result of developing a very good relationship with the Dept. of Defence and all credit to them for that working relationship.As a result the currently operate 2 xC47,Neptune, Catalina and 2x Caribou.They also have a lot of military aircraft on static display.
Civil wise they have operational at the moment as I understand it, the Connie, DC3 and the Drover, so a Convair in any airline colours is a nice balance to the Civil side of our aviation history. I suspect that the DC4 is still a long way off flying although I would be delighted to be proved wrong on that.
By any standard their operational fleet is pretty impressive.
I suspect that an L188 would be a bridge too far for any museum operator. Jet engines are not for the faint hearted or thin wallets. Also all the L188 survivors seem to have found their way to Canada as either bush freighters or fire bombers.
Come to think of it maybe we may see an L188 or 2 here for the fire season in the future?
Wunwing
Civil wise they have operational at the moment as I understand it, the Connie, DC3 and the Drover, so a Convair in any airline colours is a nice balance to the Civil side of our aviation history. I suspect that the DC4 is still a long way off flying although I would be delighted to be proved wrong on that.
By any standard their operational fleet is pretty impressive.
I suspect that an L188 would be a bridge too far for any museum operator. Jet engines are not for the faint hearted or thin wallets. Also all the L188 survivors seem to have found their way to Canada as either bush freighters or fire bombers.
Come to think of it maybe we may see an L188 or 2 here for the fire season in the future?
Wunwing
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You won't get an argument from me on that, Wunwing.
The achievements of HARS are outstanding - and I do financially support them.
Just like quite a few of us on here, I hanker for as many tastes of the old days as we can get.
The raw power of the L188 left many of us awestruck.
At least we still have the Orion to remind us of that.
.
The achievements of HARS are outstanding - and I do financially support them.
Just like quite a few of us on here, I hanker for as many tastes of the old days as we can get.
The raw power of the L188 left many of us awestruck.
At least we still have the Orion to remind us of that.
.
Last edited by Stanwell; 24th Aug 2016 at 08:12.
Al E. Vator, lets not forget that HARS now has under its care, VH-AES the DC3 that operated TAA's first flight (Laverton - Sydney) 9 Sep 1946.
And that will be 70 years ago next month.
CC
And that will be 70 years ago next month.
CC
Last edited by Checklist Charlie; 27th Aug 2016 at 04:40. Reason: .
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whispering 'T' jet
I worked many hours on the TAA 72's. I think the Boeing manufacturing process was superior to that of Douglas, BAE and the like. Once familiar with the various ins and outs of the aircon system it was a piece of cake to maintain. I have even carried out an APU change (cold unit) on a turn around, albeit whilst working for SAA and the muscle were all Zulu warriors, singing as hefting the U/S unit out and installing the new one!
Thread Starter
Saw a magazine photo of the HARS bound Convair 440 departing its overseas base for Australia. Nice photo in its TAA colours. What intrigued me however, was on the one engine you could see from the camera angle, one of the two cowl flaps situated on the top of that engine, was fully open. The lower two flaps at the underneath of the engine could not be seen. It may be that particular Convair had the lower cowl flaps removed.
RAAF Convairs I flew had bottom and top sets of cowl flaps. These were essential for ground running as the closely cowled engines needed airflow to prevent overheating of the cylinders. That is why the cowl flaps were selected to fully open on the ground. In the case of the HARS departure with one of its top cowl flaps fully open I wondered if the cowl flap motor was inoperative right from the start? Perhaps lack of spares and the costs involved with delays, the crew decided to depart and get going for Australia asap and wired that top cowl flap fully open to keep the engine temperatures down during the take off and climb - especially if the weather was going to be hot.
The problem with that, would have been the performance penalty would have been significant due to the extra drag of the open cowl flap - especially if an in-flight engine failure occurred on either engine.
In the Sixties, the RAAF had a similar event like that while on the ground at Charleville en route to Darwin. The cowl flap electrics failed for the top cowl flaps on one engine. After discussion with the airman engineer who flew with the Convair, the pilot had the engineer manually set the top cowl flaps on that engine to the take off position called "trail" which was almost the closed position. Taxy to the runway was then done on one engine (good nosewheel steering).
On line up, the engine with its cowl flap already wired at the trail position, was started and when temps and pressures were within take off limits, the aircraft departed normally. On arrival at Darwin after an uneventful flight, the pilot shut down the engine (with the cowl flaps fixed at the Trail position) at the end of the landing run and taxied in on one engine. This was because the after landing drills required all cowl flaps to be set to fully open to have cooling airflow over the cylinders during taxying.
The problem was a failed top cowl flap motor which was soon rectified at Darwin. The drag from a fully open cowl flap in flight would have been significant if indeed that was the case of the HARS Convair.
There are always two sides to a story and it would be interesting to know what caused the HARS Convair to depart from its overseas base with a fully open cowl flap?
RAAF Convairs I flew had bottom and top sets of cowl flaps. These were essential for ground running as the closely cowled engines needed airflow to prevent overheating of the cylinders. That is why the cowl flaps were selected to fully open on the ground. In the case of the HARS departure with one of its top cowl flaps fully open I wondered if the cowl flap motor was inoperative right from the start? Perhaps lack of spares and the costs involved with delays, the crew decided to depart and get going for Australia asap and wired that top cowl flap fully open to keep the engine temperatures down during the take off and climb - especially if the weather was going to be hot.
The problem with that, would have been the performance penalty would have been significant due to the extra drag of the open cowl flap - especially if an in-flight engine failure occurred on either engine.
In the Sixties, the RAAF had a similar event like that while on the ground at Charleville en route to Darwin. The cowl flap electrics failed for the top cowl flaps on one engine. After discussion with the airman engineer who flew with the Convair, the pilot had the engineer manually set the top cowl flaps on that engine to the take off position called "trail" which was almost the closed position. Taxy to the runway was then done on one engine (good nosewheel steering).
On line up, the engine with its cowl flap already wired at the trail position, was started and when temps and pressures were within take off limits, the aircraft departed normally. On arrival at Darwin after an uneventful flight, the pilot shut down the engine (with the cowl flaps fixed at the Trail position) at the end of the landing run and taxied in on one engine. This was because the after landing drills required all cowl flaps to be set to fully open to have cooling airflow over the cylinders during taxying.
The problem was a failed top cowl flap motor which was soon rectified at Darwin. The drag from a fully open cowl flap in flight would have been significant if indeed that was the case of the HARS Convair.
There are always two sides to a story and it would be interesting to know what caused the HARS Convair to depart from its overseas base with a fully open cowl flap?
