Carrier Islands

In article ,
"Gord Beaman" ) writes:
"John Keeney" wrote:



The Neptune came in multiple flavors: P2V-1, P2V-3 and P2V-5
were twins with various flavors of R-3350s. The P2V-7 on the other
hand had a pair of J34s to go along with its flavor of R-3350s.
If you start talking foreign version, the Japanese even had a turbo
prop version.
I don't have the production figures handy to check the statement
that "most" had four engines.


Well, that was just off the top of my head John...seeing as how
there seemed to be many more -7's around than earlier marks and
they all seemed to have the jets...matter of fact it was so
widely believed that when some stranger at a flea market remarked
in my hearing range that the model P2V-7 he was looking at was a
fake because it had no jets I had to correct him.

The argument got quite heated and ended when I bet him (in a firm
voice) $100.00 (and produced it) that the RCAF had flown the
P2V-7 like that for awhile. (The fact that I have about 100 hours
on them helped my confidence)

He'll likely be more careful about loud public statements in
future...

It's how we learn, I guess. A lot of P2V-5s had the jets, too. I
have a P2V-5/P-2E Natops Manual kicking around here, and the jets are
definitely there. In fact, there are no takeoff distance charts for
recip-only operation - the jets were to be used on every takeoff, I
guess. (Although, being J34s, they really don't contribute all that
much - both jeta at 100 kts would give you about 1800 HP, or half an
engine's worth of thrust. Still, there's no power like Excess Power.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

"Peter Stickney" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Gord Beaman" ) writes:
"John Keeney" wrote:



The Neptune came in multiple flavors: P2V-1, P2V-3 and P2V-5
were twins with various flavors of R-3350s. The P2V-7 on the other
hand had a pair of J34s to go along with its flavor of R-3350s.
If you start talking foreign version, the Japanese even had a turbo
prop version.
I don't have the production figures handy to check the statement
that "most" had four engines.


Well, that was just off the top of my head John...seeing as how
there seemed to be many more -7's around than earlier marks and
they all seemed to have the jets...matter of fact it was so
widely believed that when some stranger at a flea market remarked
in my hearing range that the model P2V-7 he was looking at was a
fake because it had no jets I had to correct him.

The argument got quite heated and ended when I bet him (in a firm
voice) $100.00 (and produced it) that the RCAF had flown the
P2V-7 like that for awhile. (The fact that I have about 100 hours
on them helped my confidence)

He'll likely be more careful about loud public statements in
future...

It's how we learn, I guess. A lot of P2V-5s had the jets, too. I
have a P2V-5/P-2E Natops Manual kicking around here, and the jets are
definitely there. In fact, there are no takeoff distance charts for
recip-only operation - the jets were to be used on every takeoff, I
guess. (Although, being J34s, they really don't contribute all that
much - both jeta at 100 kts would give you about 1800 HP, or half an
engine's worth of thrust. Still, there's no power like Excess Power.

I had suspected there were retrofits, but couldn't produce any references
quickly. What I have did show the P2V-5s as starting life jetless.

John R Weiss ) wrote:
: "Tarver Engineering" wrote...
:
: At least on single-engine birds; some twins may have had counter-rotating
: props, but I don't think they operated from carrier decks all that much.
:
: What, like a P-3?

: Not single-engine, not a twin, no counter-rotating props, and never operated
: from a carrier...

: So, "like" what?

I expect he meant P-38.

"John Keeney" wrote:

It's how we learn, I guess. A lot of P2V-5s had the jets, too. I
have a P2V-5/P-2E Natops Manual kicking around here, and the jets are
definitely there. In fact, there are no takeoff distance charts for
recip-only operation - the jets were to be used on every takeoff, I
guess. (Although, being J34s, they really don't contribute all that
much - both jeta at 100 kts would give you about 1800 HP, or half an
engine's worth of thrust. Still, there's no power like Excess Power.

I had suspected there were retrofits, but couldn't produce any references
quickly. What I have did show the P2V-5s as starting life jetless.


Ok...I know for a fact that ours were P2V-7's and were jetless
for at least a year after we got them in about midsummer of 1955.

I believe they were retrofitted in late 1956 and I can confirm it
exactly if you need. One of my coffee buddies loves and flew them
for a few years after I left them, he even has experience with
the rockets that they used for awhile.
--

-Gord.

"Gord Beaman" wrote...

It's how we learn, I guess. A lot of P2V-5s had the jets, too. I
have a P2V-5/P-2E Natops Manual kicking around here, and the jets are
definitely there.

Ok...I know for a fact that ours were P2V-7's and were jetless
for at least a year after we got them in about midsummer of 1955.

Back in 75-78, we had -5s and -7s at VC-8 in Roosy Roads, PR. All of them had
jets. They were the last active P-2s in the US Navy, and were retired shortly
after I left in 78.

"John R Weiss" wrote:

"Gord Beaman" wrote...

It's how we learn, I guess. A lot of P2V-5s had the jets, too. I
have a P2V-5/P-2E Natops Manual kicking around here, and the jets are
definitely there.

Ok...I know for a fact that ours were P2V-7's and were jetless
for at least a year after we got them in about midsummer of 1955.

Back in 75-78, we had -5s and -7s at VC-8 in Roosy Roads, PR. All of them had
jets. They were the last active P-2s in the US Navy, and were retired shortly
after I left in 78.

Ahh yes! Rosy Roads!...great base, I've spent many a memorable
ASW exercise there.

Great NCO Club, especially enjoyable when the fleet's out...
--

-Gord.

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:
"Cub Driver" wrote in message

[various - on turning Lightnings]

You may wish to have a search for some of the CDB posts on this topic.
I cannot remember whether he made comparisons but he certainly focused
on the turning ability of the above.