Sounds underpowered, cheap and make-shift. I wonder why
they sold/bought so many of them?


"Big John" wrote in message
...
| Jim
|
| Just a few of the things.
|
| Bought to use on trail. However if you lost an engine over
the trail
| the single engine altitude way they were loaded prevented
you from
| getting over the mountains and back to VN to land.
|
| At cruise power, when FACing, you could turn about 270
degree's and
| then got the stall warning and had to go to METO power to
stay
| airborne and FAC.
|
| In 0-1 you could drop a wing and kick rudder and be on
target to fire
| a Willie Pete marking rocket. In 0-2 you had to fly a
coordinated turn
| from a base leg to the launch heading and then coordinate
corrections
| to get pipper on target.
|
| In 0-1 you lost about 150 altitude and didn't pick up any
airspeed to
| speak of. In 0-2 you picked up a lot of airspeed and lost
a lot of
| altitude and had to pull a high 'G' recovery. Doing this
all day tired
| you out in heat and also put you closer to any ground fire
from target
| area.
|
| Bird had 'X' number of feet of ground roll on take off.
You couldn't
| pull off and stagger into the air in a short field.
|
| If you landed on Laderite (sp)you almost always got rear
prop damage
| from front prop picking up rock, gravel, Msc and it
hitting the rear
| prop and causing damage.
|
| Cockpit was pretty air tight and hot at low altitude (FAC
altitude) in
| heat and moisture. No way to keep cool like you could in
the 0-1 with
| the windows open. And more and more and
more...............
|
| Big John
|
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ````````````````
|
| On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 21:57:17 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
| wrote:
|
| I know they bought a lot of them, but it seems from your
| tone, that you know first-hand. Tell us all.
|
|
| "Big John" wrote in message
| .. .
| | Jim
| |
| | Not so. Be glad to tell you the limitations of 0-2 in
VN.
| |
| | Big John
| | ```````````````````````````````````
| |
| | On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 20:18:12 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
| | wrote:
| |
| | It was not a safer twin since the failure of an engine
| was
| | not as quickly detected since there was no yaw, just
| reduced
| | performance. It did not have good baggage areas and
it
| was
| | noisy inside.
| |
| | It was successful as a FAC aircraft in VN as the O-2
| |
| |
| |
| | "Dudley Henriques" wrote in
| | message
| |
|
link.net...
| | |
| | | "john smith" wrote in message
| | |
| |
|
...
| | | Looking at the design of the C377, it seems
like
| it
| | should have been
| | | more
| | | of a winner. Why did it flop?
| | |
| | | My old CFI said guys would forget to start the
back
| | engine or not notice
| | | that it would quit and end up crashing, true or
not
| I
| | don't know but it
| | | was
| | | his story. I always thought it was an odd looking
| | piece.
| | |
| | | To that I would add that I personally think the
200
| hp
| | O-360's are not
| | | enough power for the size and weight of the
aircraft.
| | |
| | | Maintenance wise, we had a cracked case on one of
the
| | engines that was a bit
| | | costly to fix :-) and you had to monitor the EGT
| | carefully on takeoff
| | | because the noise was so bad you couldn't pick up an
| | engine problem during
| | | the run, but aside from that, fun to fly!
| | |
| | | Dudley Henriques
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
|
|