Warbird Information Exchange

N221AG may be registered as a "McKinnon G-21G", but it is NOT a McKinnon G-21G Turbo Goose. McKinnon did not build it. McKinnon did not design it and he did not even conceive of this particular aircraft or its unique configuration.

Two guys in particular at the Fish & Wildlife Service of the US Department of the Interior in Anchorage AK conceived it, designed it, and built it. They consulted with McKinnon and approached him about certifying this configuration as a model "G-21F" under McKinnon's TC 4A24, but it never happened; the design was never certified under the TC. For whatever reasons, they chose instead to build it as a one-off conversion using STC's. They told the FAA that it would be converted first as a McKinnon G-21G under TC 4A24 and then further modified by means of additional STC's to its current configuration, BUT...

MCKINNON NEVER WORKED ON IT AND HE NEVER CERTIFIED IT AS A G-21G UNDER TC 4A24!

The FWS people in AK simply just started calling it a "McKinnon G-21G" one day (March 5, 1974 in fact) without ever submitting any proper supporting documentation. My belief is that they simply wanted to piggy back on the existing certification of the McKinnon model G-21G in order to be able to operate this particular aircraft at the real G-21G's greatly increased gross weight (12,500 lbs for the McKinnon G-21G compared to a standard Grumman G-21A Goose with fixed floats at 8,000 lbs or a G-21A with McKinnon's retractable wingtip floats at 9,200 lbs.)

In reality, they (FWS) just modified it directly to its current configuration and at no time whatsoever has it ever conformed to the McKinnon G-21G type design as defined by TC 4A24 and the McKinnon model G-21G Master Drawing List, Report No. MPD-90995. In fact, while there ARE copies of the applications for the STC's for the special and unique modifications made to this aircraft on file with the FAA, there is NO record (such as via an official FAA Form 337) that they were ever actually installed. The proof is right there for all to see in the archived records that anyone can obtain from the FAA Aircraft Registry Branch in Oklahoma City.

In my professional opinion, this aircraft has not been technically "airworthy" for 35 years because it fails to meet the first part of the definition of "airworthy" as specified in 14 CFR Part 3 Paragraph 3.5(a); it does NOT conform to its nominal type design (or even to a "properly" modified alternate configuration of that type design.)

Even when you consider that if it was never "certified" as a McKinnon G-21G and that accordingly it should still be identified as "Grumman G-21A s/n B-72" instead, then it is still not "airworthy" because it still fails the conformity test. In addition to the fact that their installation on the so-called "Aleutian Goose" was never properly documented, the STC's and modifications that it received were never approved for use on a Grumman G-21A under TC 654. Either way, it should be screwed right out of the air, but apparently nobody with a sufficient clue has ever had anything to do with it. I can abso-freakin-lutely guarantee you that any IA who has ever signed off an Annual inspection on the "Aleutian Goose" didn't understand the relationship between Grumman TC 654 and McKinnon TC 4A24 or the significance of the official documents that were and were not filed on its behalf.

Bottom line (at the very least relative to this thread) is that N221AG does NOT represent the configuration of the true "McKinnon G-21G" aircraft, which do still exist today, and it does not represent the configuration of the aircraft that Atlantic Coast Seaplaness LLC (dba Antilles Seaplanes LLC) is currently endeavoring to put back into "100% brand new" production as the Antilles model G-21G Super Goose.* If you want to see a "real" McKinnon G-21G, look up photos of either N77AQ (s/n 1205) or N70AL (s/n 1226) - or both; they're the ONLY two true model "G-21G" aircraft actually built by McKinnon.

*As I have written before, McKinnon's use of the term "Turbo Goose" was ambiguous and it was rendered obsolete by the new GAMA standards implemented in the 1970's to eliminate confusion between turbo-charged piston engines and turbine and turboprop powerplants so as to prevent the possibility of mis-fueling aircraft (especially piston aircraft with Jet fuel - they don't like that and they tend to conk out at the very worst times, such as right after take-off!)

_________________
“To invent the airplane is nothing. To build one is something. But to fly is everything!” - Otto Lilienthal

Natasha: "You got plan, darling?"
Boris: "I always got plan. They don't ever work, but I always got one!"

Remember, any dummy can be a dumb-ass...
In order to be a smart-ass, you first have to be "smart"
and to be a wise-ass, you actually have to be "wise"

Rayjay,

I appreciate your post, but I think it was a bit unnecessary. I'm pretty sure that you can (legally) call any turboprop-powered Goose a "Turbo Goose" as it was never trademarked by McKinnon or anyone else. The poster never said anything in it about the plane being a McKinnon conversion, only that it's a "Turbo Goose" he saw at Farnborough.

Exactly.

What exactly did you "appreciate" about my post?

I never said anything about a trademark violation. My objection to the reference to the "Aleutian Goose" in this thread had nothing to do with the fact that Mr. Flyingkiwi referred to it as a "Turbo Goose" - it had to do with the fact that the "Aleutian Goose" was mentioned here at all. The "Aleutian Goose" is irrelevant to this thread.

Boiled down, I said two things:

1) Although N221AG is "registered" as a McKinnon G-21G Turbo Goose, it is NOT a McKinnon G-21G Turbo Goose.

2) The original subject of this thread is the new versions of the McKinnon G-21G Turbo Goose that will be built by the current TC holder as the Antilles Seaplanes G-21G Super Goose, and N221AG is NOT representative of that type design.

OK, call that four things if you like...

How much do you really know about turboprop-powered Gooses?

Other than Fish & Wildlife's so-called "Aleutian Goose" and two G-21A's modified by Alaska Coastal-Ellis Airlines, the only Gooses ever to be certified with turboprop engines were products of McKinnon Enterprises Inc. - regardless of whether or not Angus McKinnon ever trademarked the name "Turbo Goose". Although the two other Gooses modified by Alaska Coastal do still exist, they were restored to their original radial-engine configurations long ago. Right or wrong, the only turboprop Gooses in existence at this time are associated with the McKinnon name.

(Well, technically speaking, the Kaman K-16B is also a turboprop Goose and still exists - in a museum, but of course it was just experimental tilt-wing testbed and it was never certified.)

I did not mean to jump all over Mr. Flyingkiwi in particular, but the subject of the "Aleutian Goose" offends me. As an aviation professional, it offends me that FWS did such a sloppy job with the paperwork for "their" (not McKinnon's) conversion of N780 (Grumman G-21A s/n B-72) in the early 1970's - and got away with it for so many years. It offends me that the FAA does not appear to have paid enough attention to what really transpired during that project - as evidenced by the sparse and insufficient paperwork that was in fact filed with the FAA. It offends me that ever since the early 1990's when it went from "public use" into the realm of private ownership, it has been subject to at least a dozen and a half Annual inspections, but apparently not one was conducted by someone who took the time to truly research the airworthiness and conformity issues of the aircraft. And it offends me that the FAA still does not appear to have paid sufficient attention to that particular aircraft.

It also offends me that the current owner of N221AG (who also hails from the Dallas area - would you happen to be a friend or relative, Mr. CAPFlyer?), after first signing on as a sales rep and agent for Antilles Seaplanes, is now running around all over the world (literally) claiming that his aircraft is THE turbine Goose on the market and that he can build new ones to satisfy the market that Antilles Seaplanes has been cultivating for the last few years.

I do mean to spread the word that what he is advertising is not a viable (i.e. certifiable) product and that he cannot possibly satisfy that market - at least not anytime soon and not without spending $200 Million dollars over the next 10 years to get a new type certificate approved. Not only does he not have any type design data that is approved for production, his sole example has significant conformity issues that should force it to be grounded (as I said earlier - IMPO!) What he does have is a one-of-a-kind prototype of a design that was never certified and that has no valid basis for production.

I don't give a S&!t about trademarks. I'd love a good and informed debate though. Try to prove that I'm wrong about N221AG. Go order your own copy of the Airworthiness and Registration records for "N221AG" serial number "1240" from the FAA Aircraft Registration Branch in Oklahoma City, read through them, and then tell me if you can when, where, and by whom the so-called "Aleutian Goose" was certified as a McKinnon model G-21G. The URL to order those records online is http://162.58.35.241/e.gov/ND/airrecordsND.asp

BTW: my handle/avatar is "Rajay" R-A-J-A-Y! There is no "y" in the middle. It says so right there on my last post, the one that was right in front of you when you replied.

This guy obviously has it right, since after all, he is the current owner of the Rajay / Roto-Master STC's; the very first hit searching for "rajay" on Google: http://www.rajayparts.com/index.htm

If you do a search for "rayjay" on Google, you don't even get an aviation related "hit" until halfway down page 2 and this I love (http://www.aeroaccessories.com/fuelpumps/rayjayappguide.html) because quite coincidentally he used to be a partner in Antilles Seaplanes and left on less than amicable terms and here I have this lovely opportunity to "zing" him too....

_________________
“To invent the airplane is nothing. To build one is something. But to fly is everything!” - Otto Lilienthal

Natasha: "You got plan, darling?"
Boris: "I always got plan. They don't ever work, but I always got one!"

Remember, any dummy can be a dumb-ass...
In order to be a smart-ass, you first have to be "smart"
and to be a wise-ass, you actually have to be "wise"