Thread: Skymaster MEL
View Single Post
  #2  
Old April 26th 07, 05:28 AM
rotor&wing rotor&wing is offline
Member
  
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Sep 2005
Location: florida
Posts: 38
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by C J Campbell[_1_] View Post
On 2007-04-25 08:33:38 -0700, Peter Clark
spam said:

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:16:07 -0700, C J Campbell
 wrote:


If this is a pressurized Skymaster you might as well get the
pressurized and high altitude sign-offs as well.

Does the pressurized Skymaster have a service ceiling in excess of
FL250?

No, you are right. The service ceiling is only 19,500 feet. I had
forgotten about this limitation, but I think it was because of the
windows, which were never really optimal for pressurized flight.

The Skymaster is a fun airplane to fly, although it has its oddities.
It is nice and roomy and easy to get in and out of. The pressurized
versions are not great photography planes, of course. Rear visibility
suffers some. There have been some problems with overheating of the
rear engine while taxiing, so some pilots have taxied with only the
front engine and then forgotten to start the rear before taking off.
The Skymaster will take off on one engine, but it needs a lot more
runway.

One of the only airplanes I ever saw crash was an O-2, the military
version of the Skymaster. The doggone thing collapsed its nose gear on
touchdown at Clark AB in the Philippines. The pilot managed to eject,
but the plane balled itself up. Pilot had a broken leg. Man, that guy
was ticked.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Yet another buffoon posting by CJ Campbell. First of all, you know nothing of Skymasters as demonstrated by your post. The "P" Skymaster was developed as a pressurized airplane (has a 3.5 dif) and the windows are such, and there is a difference between "P" windows and normal aspirated. As far as service ceiling, at FL200 the cabin of the "P" is at 10K.

The overheating of the rear engine is a myth, brought about from the days of the 336 which had an entirely different cowl for the rear engine. The 337 cowling did away with that.

As far as your story of the O2, it's total bull****. O2's were never outfitted with ejection seats. And besides, even a collapsed nose gear on landing will be like any other plane, banged up prop and scratched up.