Warbird Information Exchange

Retired tankers #77 and #95 up for auction:

https://publicsurplus.com/sms/browse/cataucs?catid=19

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

If only... would love to get my hands on one.

_________________
Keep Em' Flying,
Christopher Soltis
Dedicated to the preservation and education of The Sikorsky Memorial Airport

CASC Blog Page: http://ctair-space.blogspot.com/
Warbird Wear: https://www.redbubble.com/people/warbirdwear/shop

Chicks Dig Warbirds.......right?

Especially with the rare "Engine: 2 Lycomimg R1820-82B " !

Randy

Tanker 95 was based at my local, hometown air attack base (Ukiah, CA). I never failed to look outside when the round engines passed over the house. Neighbors were not as enthralled but still I never heard a complaint about noise. Living on the urban/rural interface will cause that.

What are the odds that both retirees would have Lycoming-built R-1820's? Perhaps that's why both aircraft are retirees?

And it wasn't until today that I discovered Pratt & Whitney Canada built R-1820's under license. What's this world coming to LOL?

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

N406DF arrived there in October 2007, the other one around the same time.

de Havilland Canada built Trackers under license too!
Does this Canadian $h!t never end?!?!?

Andy

My T-28D had an R-1820-86A built by Lycoming complete with Lycoming data plate. Of course Studebaker built 1820's as used on B-17's. My late father-in-law who was a flight engineer on -17's that he considered the Studes were "junk" compared to Wright builds...

I've heard that opinion before...I believe Col. Morgan of Memphis Belle fame said the same thing.

But as a former member of the Studebaker club (I restored an Avanti) I think it's more of guilt by association (or mind over matter) ..nobody wants to fly behind an engine made from a lower mid-price car company (although Studebaker did make some well regarded luxury cars in the '30s...those models are recognized as "Full Classics" by the Classic Car Club of America).

A couple of years ago, a tour B-17 came to town...three of its engines were Studebaker-built. I don't know about the relative survival rates of Wright versus Stude, but if they were THAT bad, would they be using them on tours? It's not like the wartime USAAF days where a crew chief had to use what supply gave him.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Once the engine has been overhauled, no telling which original parts remain. Maybe just the nose case with the data plate? Either the cylinders and internal parts pass inspection or they don't!