Fairchild 24, thoughts?

flightsimer · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:23 am

Our museum has two Fairchild 24's. One is a c8C that has been converted to a Ranger engine and the other is a rare, C8D, which only ten were made.

The D model is in storage as the C model was chosen to be restored first. The aircraft is almost ready to be covered. I was pretty bored today and did some painting. What do you guys think about these schemes? I wanted something nobody else had but yet wanted to keep the classical look.

The colors are changeable and I'm actually thinking about a red or maroon instead of green. We haven't even decided if it is going to be done in a civilian paint or military scheme.

Version one

Version two

So what do you think about the design?

k5083 · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:54 pm

If it's a "museum," aren't the aircraft's original colors, either from manufacture or at some other historically interesting point in its history, the obvious choice?

Seems to me the burden would be on the museum to justify a departure from that, and "we like checkers" isn't a justification that would impress me.

August

flightsimer · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:38 pm

It is indeed owned and being restored by an aviation museum, however with that said, it should also be said that it is not being restoring to be 100% original to how it was delivered. There are many variations between the various models of 24's and even the same model but different year. As I said prior, ours had the Ranger Engine conversion done to it at some point. I would even wager that it is probably safe to say that no two 24's out there are the exact same.

It's panel has been made from scratch using the old panel as a template, however, it was finished differently than the factory one was as well as the fact that the original itself is not the normal panel found in most 24's, at least all the ones I have seen. However, I have seen pictures of panel that were very similar to ours.

The craftsmanship done on it is top notch and it could be a show piece, however it will also be a club plane for members to fly in addition to going to shows and events.

The paint scheme above came to me last night in my sleep. There is are many aspects of the above design that comes from the factory original designs, at least what I believe were the factory originals. The solid green area is typical for 24's except for the most aft part which would typically come out to a point just ahead and above the horizontal stabilizer. The checkered cheat line can be found on many Scarab powered 24, but is normally a solid color. I have also seen some with both the solid color around the cockpit and upper fuselage and the cheat line, but the cheat line is thinner.

We are still a while away from painting due to other priorities on flying aircraft. It could still end up military. Was just curios how people thought of the design as it is now.

flightsimer · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:24 pm

I wanted to see what it would look like with red/maroon. I think it looks a lot better than the non-intended john Deere.

Version 1

Version 2.1

Snake45 · **Joined:** Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:49 pm **Posts:** 864

I like the red with maroon trim better. It looks less like a taxicab than the yellow one.

Beautful airplane, BTW. One of my two favorite classics, the other being the Bellanca Airbus/Aircruiser.

JohnB · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:44 pm

Being in a museum, I'd recommend that if you do put it in a civil scheme, that it be similar to (but perhaps different colors if the originals are unknown or because of taste) the factory scheme.

ignomini · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:34 pm

Although the Fairchild makes any color look good, maroon is particularly well suited. First airplane I ever flew.

wacoykc · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:09 pm

In my personal opinion, an early F24 should be painted in a factory style scheme, none of which included checkers. The N number should be back on the rudder as per original instead of the side of the fuselage which totally detracts from the airplane. I would do some more research, particularly with the Fairchild Type Club and paint a historical scheme. Look at photos of how people painted antiques back in the 1960's and early 70's and you' ll see why people went back to more traditional schemes. However, with that said, it belongs to your museum so you can paint it the way you want. I can say that if the airplane ever has to be sold, one with an original style paint scheme will sell before one without!

Tiger Tim · **Posted:** Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:30 am

The checkers don't really do it for me but it's your guys airplane so just put it in the air however you want it.

How about a nice Coast Guard scheme?

Or a late war gloss sea blue with stars and meatballs, a striped rudder, invasion stripes, a shark mouth, and nose art on the door incorporating some clever pun. Whatever turns your crank, just get people flying.

-Tim

marine air · **Posted:** Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:39 pm

Okay, here's the deal. The civiliian paint schemes from that era can be quite beautiful. Especially hand rubbed lacquer. Some of the military paint schemes, like the RAF camo are okay
but fall short of being jaw -dropping. How important are the aesthetics? Second, how is the aircraft to be used? If it's going to be used to generate revenue like air tours, then you may want to go civilian. If it will be used to receive airshow appearance fees and military open houses, then it has to be military. For flight training it really doesn't matter.
I think the civilian paint schemes bring a little more money at re-sale.
Oh, I have some flight time and gave a check out to a new buyer of a 1937 Fairchild 24 W. It only had 145 hp. FLew well enough but climb was very poor in the summer with only two people on board. It's about the same difficulty as a Stearman maybe a touch easier. The 37 had a non steerable tailwheel. IF people think they can jump right in it then they will tear the gear out from under it. You have to have a real check out. My friend took his to Oshkosh and had to land on RWY36 with a strong crosswind, He groundlooped it in front of God and 200,000 people! DIdn't hurt it though.

flightsimer · **Posted:** Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:42 pm

I myself like the Military schemes for it and those would be my first choice. However, no decision has ever been made between civilian vs military.

My schemes were more or less just due to boredom and I was curious about what you guys thought about them.

Ignomini, I completely agree! Red and Maroon are by far the best looking colors on the aircraft.

Tiger Tim wrote:

Or a late war gloss sea blue with stars and meatballs, a striped rudder, invasion stripes, a shark mouth, and nose art on the door incorporating some clever pun. Whatever turns your crank, just get people flying.
-Tim

Hows this Tim? Took me all of 10 minutes to make up

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:49 pm

Love it. Done. This wins.

flightsimer · **Posted:** Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:51 pm

marine air wrote:

Okay, here's the deal. The civiliian paint schemes from that era can be quite beautiful. Especially hand rubbed lacquer. Some of the military paint schemes, like the RAF camo are okay
but fall short of being jaw -dropping. How important are the aesthetics? Second, how is the aircraft to be used? If it's going to be used to generate revenue like air tours, then you may want to go civilian. If it will be used to receive airshow appearance fees and military open houses, then it has to be military. For flight training it really doesn't matter.
I think the civilian paint schemes bring a little more money at re-sale.
Oh, I have some flight time and gave a check out to a new buyer of a 1937 Fairchild 24 W. It only had 145 hp. FLew well enough but climb was very poor in the summer with only two people on board. It's about the same difficulty as a Stearman maybe a touch easier. The 37 had a non steerable tailwheel. IF people think they can jump right in it then they will tear the gear out from under it. You have to have a real check out. My friend took his to Oshkosh and had to land on RWY36 with a strong crosswind, He groundlooped it in front of God and 200,000 people! DIdn't hurt it though.

It will go to any airshowor event that will pay for it along with any event our members want to fly it to. So it will be both a show plane and a club plane. No training will be done in it though.

Yeah ours is going to be quite the handful on landing by the sounds of it. It will have either the 175 or 200hp ranger. We have five different variants to chose from in storage, but I think they are leaning towards the 175 as it's most complete with all the accessories. It too will have no steering and to top it off, they decided to put cable brakes in it rather than hydraulic.

DH82EH · **Posted:** Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:18 pm

Tiger Tim wrote:

Or a late war gloss sea blue with stars and meatballs, a striped rudder, invasion stripes, a shark mouth, and nose art on the door incorporating some clever pun. Whatever turns your crank, just get people flying.
-Tim

Hows this Tim? Took me all of 10 minutes to make up

[/quote]

_________________
Tyler Pinkerton
Active Member of Air Heritage Inc. of Beaver Falls, PA.
Aircraft: C47B, C-123K, Fairchild F-24, Funk Model B, L-21B, T-28B, T-34B
Static: F-4C Phantom II, F-15A, T-3 Provost

Nailed it! :lol:

I like the idea of bouncing ideas off of folks. Some great input everyone.

Andy Scott

Snake45 · **Joined:** Sat Apr 05, 2014 5:49 pm **Posts:** 864

My eyes! My eyes! :shock:

Warbird Information Exchange

Fairchild 24, thoughts?

Who is online