Warbird Information Exchange

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.

Thanks for the heads-up, this bird fascinates me to no end! Wonder why they're selling after so many years in the family?

"18 mph stall"

_________________
Cheers,
Kurt Maurer
League City, Texas

PIC, Ford 6600 pulling Rhino batwing up and down the runway

Aren't there Scout projects in Alaska as well?

Back in the '90s there is was one for sale in Trade-a-Plane...no price or details were given. Just a P.O. box in Alaska. I replied and never heard anything back.

I've lived these since I was a kid and read Peter M. Bowers' Boeing Aircraft since 1916.

_________________
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.

I think this that one, was at Oshkosh last year.

Phil

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.

All the Scout projects were owned by the same Alaska family. except for this one flyer, they were all sold to Mr. Harker in Minnessota. You know the same guy with the F-82E Twin Mustang project and two or three H model Mustang projects. So they have the remaining four projects in storage. Sadly, to make a market for something this rare, you actually have to get it into circulation and build interest. It would have been so much better and received so much more publicity if the other projects had gone to say, three different owners like Rod Lewis, POF, and the Fighter Factory. It's pretty much an almost unknown type at this point.
It won a Golden Wrench Award at Oshkosh and is flawless. It's fun to fly and stalls at 18 mph. I think the owner told me he's afraid to land slower than 26! It's also the last aircraft design to be built in the old Stearman factory in Wichita, albeit it is a Boeing.

I have my money on Kermit buying it. Seems like something he'd love to own and fly around the patch.

_________________
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?

Well that's different looking.



Too bad only a dozen were made. Looks like a fun bird.

_________________
Scott Rose
Editor-In-Chief/Webmaster
Warbirds Resource Group - Warbird Information Exchange - Warbird Registry

Be civil, be polite, be nice.... or be elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------------
This site is brought to you with the support of members like you. If you find this site to be of value to you,
consider supporting this forum and the Warbirds Resource Group with a VOLUNTARY subscription
For as little as $2/month you can help ($2 x 12 = $24/year, less than most magazine subscriptions)
So If you like it here, and want to see it grow, consider helping out.



Thanks to everyone who has so generously supported the site. We really do appreciate it.

Follow us on Twitter! @WIXHQ

Would be nice to see one in Fish and Wildlife Service markings.

_________________
Kevin McCartney

Most of the period photos I've seen seem to be of the same Army ship with apparently staged photos taken during trials showing it being towed by a Jeep.

This was before the competition that resulted in the Cessna L-19 becoming operational. That was an interesting competition with lots of contenders.
I wonder if they had gone ahead with the Scout if there would have been a Birddog...and how the Scout would have done in Vietnam?

_________________
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.

Okay, may I clarify, as I understand it. The YL-15 just like the Convair L-13 was an attempt to bridge the gap Between fixed wing and the still unreliable and problematic rotary wing platforms. Boeing pulled out every STOL trick known at the time to get some ridiculously low air speeds. It also is designed for quick easy field maintenance. I think only one bolt holds on each landing gear. The wings fold and it can be towed behind a jeep.
The Cessns L-19 is an adaptation of the civilian Cessns C-170. Not saying the parts are interchangeable, but if you fly both, you can see the similarities. It was a very cheap alternative to the more complex, ultra STOL L-13 and L-15 I’ve also flown the L-17 Navion and Piper L-18 and L-21.. The Navion Had 185 hp and there’s no way you can call it STOL.

I agree the L-13 and 15 were STOL-oriented, and the L-16s (Aeronca Champs) and L-17 were "off the shelf" purchases for and not supposed to be STOL.

The L-14 was a modified Piper J-5 with Storch-like wing slats, greenhouse and gear. 800-odd were on order but cancelled at the end of the war. Some ships under construction were apparently finished and sold as civil aircraft.


The L-19 was to be a latter-day L-4, the Army wanted some short field capability, hence the huge flaps that were adapted to the later Cessna 170Bs (and Bs only). The L-19 used much of the 170 structure, but got the big flaps before the 170.

Yes, the Army wanted the '19 to have short field capability, but it wasn't the type's raison d'etre .

The requirement which led to the L-20 Beaver were for larger aircraft, not a two-seat "spotter" type.
It's said the first US military interest in the Beaver were for USAF rescue aircraft for Alaska to supplement the Cessna C-126s.
One source I have says the types considered included Beech Bonanzas, Twin Bonanzas, Aero Commander, Republic Seebee (some of which were ordered as the OA-15 and cancellled) and an early Hello Courier. The Beaver of course won.

Then the Army had a similar competition at Ft Bragg for a six seat STOL type. It appears it's main competition was the Twin Bonanza...which is hardly a STOL type. Beech eventually did sell the Twin Bonanza to the Army as the L-23, later developed into the "cabin class" Queen Air which was also bought by the Army as the L-23F/U-8F.

Sorry for the detour, it's just that I'm fascinated by L-types.
And getting back to my original point, I don't believe the L-15 was in the same competition as the L-19. In all my books, there isn't a great deal of information on the genesis of the Scout.

_________________
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.

Very informative post. Thank you.

JohnB, excellent post. There are different RFP’s (request for proposals) and the Army or D of D. will put their design specs out on the criteria. They are typically upgrading a platform or have a new need. For example, the L-4 was great but didn’t have an electrical system and couldn’t carry very much cargo, for example. I know on the Hiller Hornet helicopter, the Army wanted something that could pop up over the tree Lin’s or over a hill, take a peek and return. It only had about a 20 minute flight endurance.
The L-23 was IFR capable and could fly a Colonel and some staff members several hundred miles without having to stop to refuel. So, it would be nice to know what design competition each one of these represents. I will say this, and I’ve flown most of them, the fun meter peg increases as weight and complexity decreases.