Fri Dec 10, 2004 2:28 pm
Is this a unique problem with T-34s and ACM operators? Reason I ask is that the RCAF basically gave up on the T-34 after they lost a wing on one in 1955/56. I've always wondered if there is any connection to that accident and all the ACM accidents over the last few years? Did the U.S. military every have any spar related accidents with the non-turbo Mentors? I know nothing about T-34s, I'm just curious.
Jim
Jim
Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:43 pm
Just a bit of information to add about use of the term "ACM"....
I think since "Top Gun" came out, the term "Air Combat Maneuvering" has become the standard term people use to describe dogfighting. The problem is that in reality the military breaks down dogfighting into separate categories;
1 v 1 maneuvering = Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM)
2 v 1 maneuvering = Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM)
2 v 2 (or more) maneuvering = Air Combat Tactics (ACT)
So, to be specific, the vast majority of these dogfighting schools sell/instruct 1 v 1 maneuvering, which is actually "BFM" and not "ACM".
I think since "Top Gun" came out, the term "Air Combat Maneuvering" has become the standard term people use to describe dogfighting. The problem is that in reality the military breaks down dogfighting into separate categories;
1 v 1 maneuvering = Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM)
2 v 1 maneuvering = Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM)
2 v 2 (or more) maneuvering = Air Combat Tactics (ACT)
So, to be specific, the vast majority of these dogfighting schools sell/instruct 1 v 1 maneuvering, which is actually "BFM" and not "ACM".
N141SW...former Sky Warriors
Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:47 pm
Thanks Randy..BFM it is....
N141SW, was the "opposing" aircraft in the 1999 Georgia crash..so this
aircraft had a lot of time on its structure in this potentially Extreme
envelope.
N141SW, apparently recieved a used Baron-spar mod back in the mid 90's. Here is an AOPA article referring to the crash of N-140SW in 1999,
as well as wing&spar inspections findings performed on N141SW in 1996.
N141SW info is at the bottom of page under Additional Information....
www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/t34_accident.html?PF
Some interesting findings referring to hinge-area cracks in the wings.
N141SW, was the "opposing" aircraft in the 1999 Georgia crash..so this
aircraft had a lot of time on its structure in this potentially Extreme
envelope.
N141SW, apparently recieved a used Baron-spar mod back in the mid 90's. Here is an AOPA article referring to the crash of N-140SW in 1999,
as well as wing&spar inspections findings performed on N141SW in 1996.
N141SW info is at the bottom of page under Additional Information....
www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/t34_accident.html?PF
Some interesting findings referring to hinge-area cracks in the wings.
Air & Space article
Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:23 pm
The latest Air & Space magazine has an article on the T-34 wing problem. I don't subscribe to it, so i haven't read it yet (A&S is a bit too layman-ish ...and much to PC...for my taste).
The piece is writen by Peter Garrison of Flying Magazine, so it should be good, he's not only a talented writer but a self taught engineer
(he's designed and built to high performance homebuilts).
The piece is writen by Peter Garrison of Flying Magazine, so it should be good, he's not only a talented writer but a self taught engineer
(he's designed and built to high performance homebuilts).
Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:37 pm
Excellent infos in this thread guys!
The time is not bad for T-34s, at least for us in Canada with the only one around! We probably won't be concerned by that new crash, since TC cleared us all the way.
Paul, good for you to fly that Mentor around! How's the aircraft with the wee engine? With the 285HP it really hauls ass, but I heard it was a bit underpowered with the O-470. It might compare to the Pilatus P-3 with the 260HP.
Safe flying guys, and keep it up, I'm learning a lot of stuff here!
The time is not bad for T-34s, at least for us in Canada with the only one around! We probably won't be concerned by that new crash, since TC cleared us all the way.
Paul, good for you to fly that Mentor around! How's the aircraft with the wee engine? With the 285HP it really hauls ass, but I heard it was a bit underpowered with the O-470. It might compare to the Pilatus P-3 with the 260HP.
Safe flying guys, and keep it up, I'm learning a lot of stuff here!
T-34 Association Response to Crash of TAA T-34
Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:19 am
I found an interesting statement by the T-34 Association. In this release
Mr. Nogle states, the "left wing separated, not the right", and that
the "Forward main spar(Baron spar) is intact and that the carry-through
structure failed."
He goes on to explain that the NTSB has granted the T-34 Association, Inc. "party status" to the investigation. The Association will be sending
a technical member, "who is extremely knowledgeable about the T-34 wing structure, to assist the accident investigation team."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/T-34/message/3703
It is good the Association will have some "on-site eyes" and one
who is intimately experienced with the T-34.
Mr. Nogle states, the "left wing separated, not the right", and that
the "Forward main spar(Baron spar) is intact and that the carry-through
structure failed."
He goes on to explain that the NTSB has granted the T-34 Association, Inc. "party status" to the investigation. The Association will be sending
a technical member, "who is extremely knowledgeable about the T-34 wing structure, to assist the accident investigation team."
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/T-34/message/3703
It is good the Association will have some "on-site eyes" and one
who is intimately experienced with the T-34.
Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15 am
Hi Ollie
In your personal statement it says
Is French for "knock on wood"
Chris
In your personal statement it says
Norqué Wood
Is French for "knock on wood"
Chris
Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:41 pm
No, it's the name of our company.
Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:31 pm
Hi Ollie:
That was meant to be a joke.
Chris
That was meant to be a joke.
Chris
Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:44 pm
I understood that, but hey, it was pretty lame as a joke!
Sun Dec 12, 2004 12:56 am
I thought it was funny.. You didn't get the humor?, Your whole motto would be; "I'll take you flying, but you'll have to knock on wood first". I know, ok maybe it was a bad joke...
Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:16 am
Yeap, please keep your daytime job, as I fear that you wouldn't each much as a humorists!
Joking aside, how many people on WIX have access to a T-34?
Joking aside, how many people on WIX have access to a T-34?
Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:12 pm
Ollie wrote:Yeap, please keep your daytime job, as I fear that you wouldn't each much as a humorists!
oking aside, how many people on WIX have access to a T-34?
Ollie
I have about 3oo hrs in my bosses t-34 and we have not any trouble with ours. It has about 7000 hrs. total time. The amoc has just been completed and no faults have been found with the spar. I think if you fly them within their limits and keep up on the maintenance, they will last as long as any aircraft. The vne is the same as our Bonanza.
Mike
Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:37 pm
Excellent!
Ours has about 4 500 hours. What engine do you have in it?
Ours has about 4 500 hours. What engine do you have in it?