P-51's in movie "Empire of the Sun"

I thought that was a Bucker Bu181 Bestmann (or a derivative), but I
might be wrong.

As Captain Tenneal would say, "Well, you're wrong." (Sticking my neck
out
here) I think its a 108. Dern few Bestmanns around. Anyone know for sure?

It was in fact a Bestmann or derivative. The key is the fixed gear as the Bf
108 retracts. There are or were then several Bestmann's flying in Europe and
they were also then in production in Egypt as military trainers. Even more
recently the type was offered for sale as the Aeropony with a modern
horizontally opposed engine.

John Dupre'

oooook... snort
--

-Gord.

Still friends? Furthermore, you had 2 turning and 2 burning. I only had the
burners, so climbing was always iffy.

Q

In article ,
vincent p. norris writes:
Well, since it's the Navy, and they couldn'b be like abyone else, it's
one of those "That Depends" things again.

For example, the Amphibian models of the PBY and PBM flying boats were
the PBY-5A and the PBM-5A.

But the F4U-1 Corsair with the bulged canopy was an F4U-1A.
(And the version with 4 cannons was an F4U-1D).

But weren't the letters A, B, C. D, assigned in alphabetical order, to
successive mods?

Not for the Navy, no. (They always have to be different. Decks, not
floors, Overheads, not ceilings. Bulkheads, not walls, Covers
instead of hats. Plentiful coffee, though.)


An uprated engine was usually signified by an 'F' tacked on, but not
always.

Even if the preceding mod was an A or a B? Are you saying the Navy
jumped over the C, D, and E? What if the preceding mod was up to G,
or H; did they go back to F?

Yep. A good example would be the F11F-1 Tiger jet fighter. WHen
Grummand replaced the original J65 with a J79, the result was teh
F11F-1F. The letter represented a specific type of modification.
'B' in the series, for example, denoted a FIghter-Bomber. For
example, the Navy's Fury series of jet fighters ran through the
following sequence -
FJ-1 The original Fury, a straight wing jet.
FJ-2 Basically a minimum-change carrier-capable (barely) version
of the F-86.
FJ-3 A complete restringing of teh FJ-2 to use a J65 engine, and
have better carrier compatibility.
FJ-3M Were FJ-3s modified to carry a pair of Sidewinders. (M for
Missile)
FJ-3D Were FJ-3s that carried Drone Director equipment. They
acted as initial guidance for Regulus cruise missiles.
FJ-4 A completely new aircraft, thinner wing, lots more fuel.
FJ-4B Fighter-Bomber/Light Attack version of teh FJ-4. A
competitor to the A4D Skyhawk.

Note that there are 3 suffix letters used: 'B' for Bomber, 'M' for
Missile, and 'D' for Drone Director.
ANd that the basic FJ designation described 3 (or 4, depending on your
point of view) completely different airframes.
To make matters worse, all FJ-4s were capable of carrying Sidewinders.


But it wasn't always consistant. An F6F-5E was a Night Fighter,

Was that not because the preceding mod was the F6F-5D?

Nope, it was becasue it had an APS-4 radar in a wingtip pod.

And the followon was the F6F-6N, with an APS-6 radar.

and an PBM-3E was an ASW Patrol Bomber.

And did that follow the PBM-3D?

No. Acutally, I goofed on the PBM-3. There wasn't a PBM-3E.
There were, however, the:
PBM-3R, a transport conversion
PBM-3C With standardized USN/Brit communications gear
PBM-3D With uprated armament adn armor
PBM-3S A dedicated ASW version.
(Note that the -3C, -3D, and -S all carried radar)

The came the PBM-5. The flavors for that one we
PBM-5
PBM-5E A PBM-5 with APS-15 radar.
PBM-5S A dedicated ASW PBM-5E
PBM-5A an Amphibian PBM-5
PBM-5G PBM-5 used by the Coast Guard for Search and Rescue.

Ah, I just dug up my list of Special Puropse Suffixes.
Suffix Possible Meaning
Letter
A Miscellaneous Modification
A Armament carried on a normally unarmed aircraft
A Arrester geat carried on a normally non-carrier
aircraft
A Built for the Army or obtained from the Army
A Amphibious Version of Flying Boat
A Land based version of a carrier aircraft
B Miscellaneous Modification
B Special Armament (As in bombs)
B British version
C Arrester gear added
C Reinforced for catapulting
C Cannon Armament
C Navy equivalent of Army 'C' series modification
CP Trimetrogon Camera
D Drop tanks
D Drone COntrol
D Navy equivalent of Army 'D' series modification
D Special Search
D Special Radar
E Special Electronic Equipment
F Flagship conversion (VIP transport)
F Special power plant
G Search and Rescue
G Coast Guard
G Gun carried on normally unarmed aircraft
G Navy equivaleant of Army 'G' series modification
H Hospital conversion (Air Ambulance)
H Navy equivalant of Army 'H' series mod.
J Special weather equioment
J Navy equivalent of Army 'J' series mod.
K Drone conversion
L Winterized
L Searchlight carrier
M Missile carrier
N Night Fighter
N All Weather aircraft
NA Night/All Weather aircraft stripped for day use
NL Night, Winterized
P Photo Recon
Q Elint/ECM
R Transport conversion
S ASW
T Trainer version
U Utility version
W Special search equipment
W Early Warning Radar aircraft
Z vip TRANSPORT

sIMPLE, HUH?

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

(QDurham) wrote:

oooook... snort
--

-Gord.

Still friends? Furthermore, you had 2 turning and 2 burning. I only had the
burners, so climbing was always iffy.

Q

Sure...only had the 'two by two' for a short while...then had 4
big ones for another 8 yrs. On second thought, the P2V only had
the two 3350's when I was on them, they got the burners a bit
later...
--

-Gord.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 10:01:17 -0000, "M. H. Greaves"
wrote:

I saw a video about the extensive testing of the early 747's (not the
400's), and the test pilots had a big wooden skid attached to the rear
underside, and were taking off at too steep an angle grinding the wood skid
along the ground; amazing!!

They put an oak skid on all airliners that they're certifying when
they get to the runway work. It's not exactly special to the 747.

Not having had anything to do with Cat I/II testing for transports or
bombers (just fighters), I don't know if the USAF does the same thing
with their transport airplanes, like the C-17 and C-130. I don't
recall ever having seen it, but that doesn't signify anything.

shows just how strong they were and how they could stand up to rough
treatment; of course the one at Aukland didnt have a wooden skid so the
effect must have been quite sparking, ('s'cuse the pun!!)

It always surprises me how long they can scrape the tail along the
runway without actually wearing through the skin.

Incidentally, ground effect is only there to about half the span above
the ground. For an interesting story about flying in ground effect,
look for the remarks by the (NASA?) pilot who flew the Canadian flying
saucer.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

possibly, yes but its better than losing the ass of the plane!
"Errol Cavit" wrote in message
om...
"Dave Kearton" wrote in
message ...
"M. H. Greaves" wrote in message
...
| I saw a video about the extensive testing of the early 747's (not the
| 400's), and the test pilots had a big wooden skid attached to the rear
| underside, and were taking off at too steep an angle grinding the wood
skid
| along the ground; amazing!!
| shows just how strong they were and how they could stand up to rough
| treatment; of course the one at Aukland didnt have a wooden skid so
the
| effect must have been quite sparking, ('s'cuse the pun!!)



I don't have the 747-400 manual on hand, but on one of the first few
pages
it mentions that the APU is as effective as a wooden skid, if you drag
it
along 400m of concrete.


Wooden skids give (false, thankfully in SQ286's case) APU fire warnings?

Some piccies

http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/9v-smt/3.shtml
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydispl...toryID=3200538

Discussion on aus.aviation:

www.google.com/groups?threadm=3abd9d15.0312151327.2d6555c2@posti ng.google.c
om

Cheers, Errol Cavit
"Il vino è la luce del sole catturata dall'acqua."
(Wine is sunlight held together by water.)
Attributed to Galileo Galilei

And it looks like a Wellington even!

Thanks for that, i didnt know it had crashed, it did have a tendency to be a
beast to taxi and take off, because the u/c was toed in, and at such an
angle (i.e. the oleo legs not straight down like the spitfire or the hurri'
and others), but it was deadly in the hands of an ace!
"JDupre5762" wrote in message
...
To my knowledge there is the merlin engined Bf109 at duxford, and an
originally engined one titled "GUSTAV", it was captured in the desert and
restored later it is the only one with its original daimler benz engine
still in good nick and still powering the aircraft, last i heard of it
was
when it was being carted off down under. Its probably back home by now.

G-USTAV is otherwise known as Black 6. It is a genuine Bf 109 G-6. It is
owned by the RAF museum I believe and since they had several other
examples
they allowed this one to be rebuilt to flying condition and flown for a
few
years. On its last flight before being grounded for museum display the
aircraft was crashed and heavily damaged. It has since been rebuilt for
static
display. I don't believe that it was ever shipped Down Under.

There have been two or three Spanish built Buchons rebuilt with Daimler
engines and flown in Germany. Most have been ground looped and damaged
and
then retired after being rebuilt. I believe that there are not now any
original German built Bf 109s flying though several capable of flight and
several more being restored.

John Dupre'

The talk of the flyable 'real' 109s & Hispanos has me wondering. Are
there now or were there, 'recently', (30-or so years) not counting
Israel's postwar use, any flyable Czech Avia S99s, the 109s with the
Junkers Jumo? I've read they were they nastiest of 109 variations.

I'll have to watch it again (!)

You'll see I was wrong LOL

Gordon: I've been rather busy with one thing another, and also the
signal-noise ratio after Gulf War II got a little too much for me. Too
much politics and too little talk about aircraft!

NO SH%T!

Glad to see you back, even in a quasi-lurk status.

yfGordon