Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:43 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Click here to goto Amazon.com


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:41 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:56 pm
Posts: 3448
Location: North of Texas, South of Kansas
We just had a video clip of an old Johnny Carson Show emailed to us. Comedian George Gobel was the last guest and talked a little about his time as an AT-9 instructor pilot at Altus, and later as a B-26 IP at Frederick. The clip is pure Gobel humor, with Bob Hope and Dean Martin seated beside George.

Scott


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:23 pm 
Offline
Group Captain

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 1:42 am
Posts: 419
bdk wrote:
jamesintucson wrote:
EDowning wrote:
Jamesintucson wrote:
Quote:
There are currently no plans to restore the AT-9.


Would the museum consider selling it?


Probably not. Generally we don't sell aircraft that aren't duplicates of something else in our collection.

May I respectfully request vigorous arm twisting?


I said "generally" not "never." Serious offers would receive serious consideration. As yet no one has made one. As an example, we would consider a trade for this,
http://www.courtesyaircraft.com/Fury%20Project.htm

Please note this is not an official statement of my employer.
James


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:20 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:58 pm
Posts: 3172
Location: Nelson City, Texas
If you want to go one better and go for an AT-10 I would consider selling it or trade for the Fury, and a Pony.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:27 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 2:59 pm
Posts: 1437
Location: Safford, Az
jamesintucson wrote:
bdk wrote:
jamesintucson wrote:
EDowning wrote:
Jamesintucson wrote:
Quote:
There are currently no plans to restore the AT-9.


Would the museum consider selling it?


Probably not. Generally we don't sell aircraft that aren't duplicates of something else in our collection.

May I respectfully request vigorous arm twisting?


I said "generally" not "never." Serious offers would receive serious consideration. As yet no one has made one. As an example, we would consider a trade for this,
http://www.courtesyaircraft.com/Fury%20Project.htm

Please note this is not an official statement of my employer.
James


James, I kicked my self in the tushie when I forgot to ask about the 9 you had. I only remembered when I got home to my dads and looked through the book and saw it :!: I guess I'll have to come back next X-mas :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: AT-9
PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:40 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 6831
Location: The Goldfields, Victoria, Australia
Earlier, Steve said:
Steve Nelson wrote:
...Make em a deal that you rebuild it to static and you get to copy everything in it.Both parties make out on the deal....

That would be a good route, although not as 'easy' as a straight trade.

I reckon we are going to see more of these 'two out of one' deals develop as identities remain relatively available but rebuildable wrecks become smaller and small (in numbers and content, both) See the P-38 project thread, too.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:48 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 3:08 pm
Posts: 4496
Location: chicago
How many of these are left?

_________________
.
.
Sure, Charles Lindbergh flew the plane... but Tom Rutledge built the engine!

Visit Django Studios online or Facebook!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:55 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:56 pm
Posts: 3448
Location: North of Texas, South of Kansas
One at Dayton and the project at Pima.

S


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 7:22 am 
Offline
Former Lurker

Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 9:02 pm
Posts: 2
Steve Nelson wrote:
Here are a few pics I snapped of the AT-9 at Pima back in '04. I don't know if any work has been done on her yet, but judging by their past efforts, there's more than enough there to make a complete aircraft. It does look really sad.

SN

Image

Image

Image


The AT-9 is my all time favorite aircraft. I had an old friend who built homemade aircraft and said he would make some landing gear for this plane. Unfortnately he has since passed away. There is enough material there to work with, but is there anyone at PAM with enough amition to do it? I have a 60" model of the plane sitting out there and the last I heard, they were thinking of just leaving the thing a wreck in a mountanous diorama scene with my model hanging over it as though it were a search party looking for it. I am friends with the guy who discovered it. Apparently the pilot got himself stuck inside a box canyon up in the mountains and didn't have enough power to get out so he elected to just belly it in. Someone took the landing gear to use on farm equipment. Someone else took the engines.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Curtiss AT-9 Jeep
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 10:36 am 
Offline
Flight Sergeant

Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:25 pm
Posts: 91
Location: SURPRISE AZ
Aircraft of Columbus Army Flying School 1942-1943 Curtiss AT-9 "Jeep"By Aviation Historian, Dave Trojan, Feb 2012

Aviation Cadets at the Advanced Twin Engine Flying School at Columbus Mississippi flew the Curtiss AT-9 “Jeep” during the period 1942-1943. Aviation Cadets spent about 19 hours of military training, 60 hours of ground school, and 70 or more hours of flying the AT-9 to become qualified pilots on their way to earning their wings of silver. The AT-9 was purposely designed to be a difficult aircraft to fly or land, which made it particularly suitable for teaching new pilots to cope with the demanding flight characteristics of a new generation of high-performance, multi-engine aircraft.

Development

Curtiss-Wright anticipated the requirements for a high-performance type training aircraft and designed the Curtiss-Wright model CW-25, which possessed the takeoff and landing characteristics of a light bomber aircraft. At the time, it was considered that something that processed the same basic design of the Cessna AT-8/AT-17 Bobcat, but was less stable was needed for pilot training. The CW-25 was designed for the specific transition of a pilot qualified on single-engine aircraft to a twin-engine high-performance aircraft and its very different handling techniques. The low-wing stressed-skin covered cantilever monoplane design featured a small layout. It grouped two Lycoming R-680-9 radial engines forward and used a retractable tail-wheel landing gear to achieve the performance necessary to meet the requirements of an advanced trainer. Evaluation proving satisfactory, the type was ordered into production under the designation AT-9. Named the "Fledgling" by Curtiss-Wright, it was commonly known as the "Jeep" in the United States Army Air Forces. A total of 491 AT-9s were produced and these were followed into service by 300 AT-9As with Lycoming R-680-11 radial engines and a revised hydraulic system before production ended in February 1943.

Pilot Reports

The Curtiss AT-9 Jeep was considered a "hot ship". Most of the guys that trained in these aircraft usually went on to fly P-38's and Martin B-26 Marauders. Pilots who flew both the AT-9 and the P-38 said that the P-38 Lightning was a relative piece of cake and should have been used instead to train pilots to fly the AT-9 Jeep. Designed to be a handful, it was both on the ground and in the air. One pilot once quipped that it was the only plane he ever knew about that took off at 120 mph, climbed at 120 mph, cruised at 120 mph, let down at 120 mph and landed at 120 mph. He said that “when landing your glide path was so steep they had put windows in the roof so you could see the beginning of the runway”. He was told that to do a dead stick landing you needed to simulate a dive-bombing of the end of the runway. However, he also said that the AT-9 really taught him how to fly. Another pilot said he was always a little afraid of this airplane. He claimed the AT-9 refutably would not fly on single engine and it was not the easiest aircraft to land. A different pilot said that he loved the AT-9, but thought it was “somewhat underpowered”. He went on to say that when flying the AT-9 on cool days and lightly loaded, with its high wing loading, it performed very much like a hot rod. Dave Hanst, who was an Aviation Cadet at the Army Flying School at Columbus in 1943, flew the AT-9 and remembers that it was a great flying machine, landed pretty fast, and was terrific for formation flying. He also said the wing was so short you could almost spit over the end from the cockpit.

Flight Instructor Reports

Flight Instructors had mixed feelings about the AT-9 Jeep. One instructor said that “The AT-9 had wings too small for a trainer, the fuselage was too short for the design and the wheels were not set up correctly”. Another said that he loved the aircraft, but said he practically froze flying the aircraft in the winter because it had no insulation to keep out the cold and a very meager heater. Many instructors were scared of the AT-9 and were ultra cautious at low altitudes and speeds because of its nasty stall characteristics. The AT-9 would stall out a wing before landing if you tried a three point landing. The pilot had to fly the airplane with power on and then bring the tail wheel down immediately. Waiting for the tail to come down on its own would result in an accident. Applications of power had to be done very smoothly as otherwise this would also result in an accident. When flown by the numbers, instructors said it had a reputation as one of the finest handling aircraft flying in the inventory. Although at one advanced twin engine training base, the policy was to NEVER allow students to fly the AT-9 without an instructor. Solo work was accomplished in other aircraft such as the Beech AT-10. One instructor said it was actually fairly fun to fly until one engine stopped producing and things went immediately downhill pretty quickly, both figuratively and literally.

AT-9 Jeeps at Columbus AAF

At least forty AT-9 Jeeps were assigned to training squadrons at Columbus AAF. A circa 1943 photo of Columbus AAF shows the flight line full of AT-9s. They were assigned to the 423rd, and 427th, Twin Engine Flying Training Squadrons. There were at least 47 accidents involving AT-9s assigned to Columbus between May 27, 1942 and November 14, 1943. Ten were major accidents that completely destroyed the aircraft with at least four different accidents causing fatalities. Accidents in the AT-9 Jeep were a regular occurrence that included everything from the landing gear being retracted when the engines were started for preflight, to colliding in flight with power lines while hedgehopping. A review of accident reports found 14 take off accidents, 22 landing, and a few bail outs during the less than two year operational period at Columbus. One unfortunate AT-9, serial number 41-5756 suffered from no less than three accidents. On 27 June 1942 it was involved in a taxiing accident; on 1 September 1942 it had a landing accident that involved a ground collision and on 23 October 1942 it had another landing accident due to mechanical failure.

Disposition

The AT-9 Jeep remained in use for a comparatively short time at both Columbus Army Flying School and by the USAAF as a whole. The U.S. Aviation industry developed far more effective and safer training aircraft by the second half of WWII. The last few AT-9s at Columbus AAF were assigned to the 28th Head Quarters Squadron by September 1943. All AT-9s at Columbus AAF appeared to have been transferred out by the end of 1943 in favor of better performing Beech AT-10 aircraft. Because of its difficult flying characteristics, the AT-9 was not offered for sale to civilians after the war, although many non-flying examples were given to ground schools for training purposes.

Only two AT-9s survive today, AT-9A serial number 41-12150 is on permanent display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio. This aircraft required extensive restoration, and was the product of restoration specialists incorporating two incomplete airframes together, along with parts fabricated on site. The wreckage of AT-9A serial number 42-56882 was recovered from a crash site in 2003 and was turned over to the Pima Air & Space Museum for restoration. This aircraft is incomplete and will require a long and extensive restoration for display. It crashed December 10, 1942 while on a search for a missing AT-17. The AT-9A struck a ridge of the Black Mountains in the Gila National Forest near Hot Springs NM.

Footnote: There are a number of AT-9 crash sites around Mississippi. I'm researching and investigating them. Hopefully I'll find one. I have a large collection of photos of AT-9s at Columbus AAF and elsewhere.
DaveT


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Curtiss AT-9 Jeep
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 12:37 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:32 am
Posts: 3866
Location: Battle Creek, MI
Here are a couple pics of the only surviving complete AT-9 at the NMUSAF. A pretty impressive restoration.

SN

Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Curtiss AT-9 Jeep
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 4:31 pm 
Offline
Pilot Officer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:23 am
Posts: 106
Location: Vermilion Ohio
Just some info I have via Dept Of Defense Surplus Sales Catalogs: According to Invitation For Bid 27-1019, opened 4 DEC 90, an AT-9 was offered and broken down thus - 1 ea. Fuselage (7' 4" dia.), 1 ea. Fuselage (4' 8" dia, 12' long), 1 ea. Fuselage (5' dia., 13' long), 2 ea Wing Section with nacelle, (11'9" long , 20' wide), 1 tail wing section with Fuselage (9' long x 20'8"" wide) plus a helicopter body (22'6" long x 6' tapered dia. weighing 1400 pds). Obviously there is something else mixed in pile. This sale was purchased by Texas Turbo Jet of Dallas Texas for .21 cents per pound times 35,500 pounds.

A succeeding sale - IFB 27-1066, opened 2 APR 91 has the same information as 4 DEC 90 sale, but doesn't indicate the 22' 6" as a helicopter. This time AT-9 was sold to Deep Run Salvage, Deep Run Rd, Martins Ferry Ohio at .1022 cents per pound times 35,500. Both sales indicated AT-9 as located at WPAFB. I did not see any other sale for an AT-9 after the April 1991 date......
8) Leon

_________________
Be happy to serve your fellowman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Curtiss AT-9 Jeep
PostPosted: Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:33 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:08 pm
Posts: 1065
Location: Tulsa, OK
Eric Downing and Scott (SecondAirForce)-
A day late and a dollar short, but look what I found this evening in a stack of Spartan stuff- is this not the Spartan AT-9? Sure looked like it to me...

(sigh)...

kevin

Image

_________________
FOUND the elusive DT-built B-24! Woo-hoo!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DaveM2, Google Adsense [Bot] and 39 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group