This NG is turning

Subject: C-46 -was- This NG is turning
From: "Leanne"
Date: 9/14/2004 8:54 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

That's enough left seat time to have memorised the individual screw
holes in the instrument panel. From memory there were only a few
thousand made, unlike the C-47 - did many of them end up in the ETO? I
know they were common in the CBI on the Hump, but I've seen little
reference to them in Europe.

During its lifetime, there were over 3,000 of them built. In the ETO,
they were
used to tow gliders in the Rhein crossing of 1945, although I never saw
one
until I joined the Reserves back in the States after demob in 1946.

Air America flew them in Vietnam and other places. I used to see them all
the time in Thailand, coming and going.

Leanne


We were coming back form a mission in Germany flying west to our base in
Pontoise when we saw some C-46's towing gliders East. We later found out that
we had witnessed the beginning of Market Garden.






Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

From: (ArtKramr)
Date: 9/12/2004 7:13 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Subject: This NG is turning
From: "Jack G"
Date: 9/12/2004 5:07 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: Ow51d.1488$bj2.572@trnddc08


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: This NG is turning
From: "Jack G"
Date: 9/12/2004 4:48 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: Cf51d.1487$bj2.680@trnddc08

Are those percentages derived from actual numbers or just crude
estimates?
If you can show the numbers used in your calculations I'll believe you.
Otherwise this gets the same regard as the other drivel you post here.

Jack G.



Speaking of drivel would you tell us all about your combat experiences?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


See - more drivel from Art. He just can't help it!

Jack G.


Neocons never fight.


Arthur Kramer

And you are a liar, so what's your point?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: (ArtKramr)
Date: 9/12/2004 6:39 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

A while ago the posts here were 95% pro war, pro neocon. Today they at least
60% anti-war and anti Bush administration. Things are looking up.Kerry may
take
the day after all.


Arthur Kramer

A while ago you behaved like a mature adult. Now you lie and evade.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Rich Air down at Miami Intl was flying C46s out to the BWI - don't
know if they're still using them but it was ideal for that run. Part
of my practical for my A&P was on one of Rich's R2800s.
Walt BJ

Yes, I had about a thousand hours or so in C-46s, most in the
left seat.

I have about 800 hours in the R5C-1, which is the PROPER name of that
aircraft. (:-)) The Marine Corps had two squadrons of them (VMR 153
and VMR 252) at Cherry Point from the end of WW II till about 1953,
when they were replaced with R4Q-2s (which the Air Force mistakenly
called the C-119).

I believe the Marines flew them in the Pacific during WW II, but I
was in high school then, so I'm not sure. BTW, Tyrone Power was a
pilot in VMR 252 in the Pacific.

Ablout half of our airplanes were unpainted, the other half were
blue. But where the blue paint had worn off, there was olive-drab
paint underneath, so I always assumed the Navy got those airplanes
and gave them to the Marines, after the Army wore them out.

Needless to say, it required a bit more run length for T/Os
and landings.

Although half a century has passed since I flew one, I think we
operated them in and out of 3,000 foot strips.

In the air, unless the hydraulic control boosters were
operable, it handled about like what I imagine picking up a horse one
handed might be.

IIRC, the R5C-1 was the equivalent of the C46a, and had no hydraulic
boost. It was heavy on the controls, but not too bad; it was a lot
easier to fly than the PB4Y-2 (single-finned B-24) I had flown before.

I wonder if any of them are
still flying - the last one I heard of was around 5 years back.

I saw one being fully refurbished in Red Deer, Alberta, about 1995.
Later I saw several at Fairbanks, Alaska. They fly supplies to the
many villages unreachable except by air.

The engines are a tad more complex than the R-1280s

PW R-2800s. Hell of a good engine. The Curtiss Electric props were
troublesome, though.

vince norris

In article ,
(B2431) wrote:

George Z. Bush wrote:

I remember reading stories about the air war in WWI, and I always
wondered
why
Fokker included a third wing on that unique three-winger fighter the
Germans
used and why. I don't believe any other aircraft manufacturer built a
line
model with three wings, but I could be wrong about that.


As usual you are wrong. The Brits had the Sopwith triplane.

Snoopy was a Brit?

ubject: C-46 -was- This NG is turning
From: vincent p. norris
Date: 9/14/2004 6:12 PM Pac

PW R-2800s. Hell of a good engine. The Curtiss Electric props were
troublesome, though.

vince norris

Yeah. The same with the B-26 Marauders.If a runaway prop threw a blade there
was always a chance it could behead a pilot. The props were in perfect line
with the cockpit.Luckily that rarely happened.






Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

While I've never been a member of an aircrew, I cannot help but marvel
at the longevity of some aircraft designs. It's really hard to think of
the Gooney Bird or the Buff, and many others, as soulless.

"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...

As usual you are wrong. The Brits had the Sopwith triplane.


Snoopy was a Brit?


Doesn't Snoopy fly a Camel?

vincent p. norris wrote:
PW R-2800s. Hell of a good engine. The Curtiss Electric props were
troublesome, though.


The early ones also had electric fuel pumps that had a bad tendency to go BOOM
from time to time. Not all C-46s lost over the Hump flew into the mountainside.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com