Warbird Information Exchange

OK, it is not actually mounted on Doc but maybe thats a good thing. It still gives them time to convert to the model of the 3350 that the CAF has for Fifi.

In any case its good to see some progress.

http://videos.kansas.com/vmix_hosted_ap ... &sort=NULL

Pete

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook

Just to repeat......my during my past conversations with Tony Mazolini, he expressed no desire whatsoever to do the same engine conversion that we came up with for FIFI. It's orignal engines for Doc. Good luck.

Gary

Gary,

I don't think there is anyone out there that doesn't look at the Fifi engine project with total admiration; if not drooling at the possibilities of solving the inherent weakness. From a longevity, cost, and the Fifi group's experience with rebuilding the WWII 3350's, what they are doing makes total sense.

From what I have read from B-29 diaries, the better 3350's of the day would only go around 300 hours. The promises of something better than the failed overhauls that gave far less than 300 hours was demanded. Thank you and the Fifi group for their innovative and pioneering spirit. Everyone's hopes are that someday these developments will end up on another flyable B-29.

I can't really speak for the Doc group, I can only guess the motivation is both legal (from prior agreements), as well as financial. It is admirable what they have been able to do, though, with the donations they have received from small businesses, as well as Boeing/Spirit. Many people don't realize just how many raw materials go into a restoration of that magnitude, and how much those small items can add up to big ones. In that respect the Boeing/Spirit donations have been substantial, though for a major corporation to sponsor engines, etc that show up as cash donations on a balance sheet would be impracticle; especially when management was/is located off the site and in another state, with that state having their own aviation museum and projects.

Also, I think that the Doc volunteers that I have dealt with at the lower levels (grunt workers), have nothing but good things to say about Fifi, and that it is unfortunate that a few people might have soiled some of the good will that the Fifi group shares.

Thanks for those words, Edward. I reckon I needed to add that one of the reasons Tony didn't express any interest in our idea for the new engines was because, at the time, he was obligated by Boeing, to make Doc as original as possible. That included using the original engines.

I certainly respect what the Doc bunch has done with what they have, but there is no doubt that they have a long road in front of them. I wish them the best, for sure.

Gary

You really can't blame them for wanting original engines. FIFI has been around a long long time and the CAF plan makes good sense for them. Doc will be a newcomer, and I would probably want to give it a go with the original engines myself in their position. I wish them all the best too!

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

Visit Django Studios online or Facebook!

But most importantly who did the overhauls on Doc's engines?

The USAF, 53 years ago. That engine was pulled from a can that had been stored since then.

Scott

Although neat to see the engine run it's really not any more significant then when they made one of the Kee Bird's original engines spit and sputter a little bit. It's not like the engine is air worthy.

yah.., i have to admit i was very disappointed as well. The news had billed it as an engine 'run-up'..., that was NOT an engine run-up.., more like an engine 'putt-putt'. but hey.., you have to crawl before you can walk!

Go 'Doc'!

_________________
S.

Long-term question is when it's finally in a flyable status, then where and how often would it be flown.

are those the original R-3350-23-23A/-41 they are using on doc, if so, i read on one web site that the military were changing those out in as little as 70 hours. now that may have been because they had to push them up so hard because on the bomb load, but still that's a LOT of maintance. it's my understanding that the CAF is estimating maybe 1000 hrs out of the new designed 3350s they are putting on FiFi. now i wish the good folks with Doc and the CAF long and trouble free flying, but those R-3350-23-23A/-41 i would have to think must still have issues.
P.S. i got to see DOC last summer, when it was outside, they are doing a realfine job as they go. Good Luck to them as they proceed.

I have a hangar here in Wendover - and we are going to start work on renovating it this year!!

Tom P.

That engine being run is a -57 or -59. It has direct fuel injection. If you lok carefully you can see the injector lines. The -57 had Bendix fuel injection while the -59 had Bosch fuel injection.