For those who don't know, the C-117 was the last variant of the Douglas DC-3. Up-engined, and with a slightly redesigned wing and tail it was marketed as the "Super DC-3."
No airlines were interested, but the Air Force, Navy, and Marines liked it just fine and bought a number of them. The Marines were still operating them in the 70's when I was stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in North Carolina. We called them "Hummers." Why? Well, jets screamed, but "Hummers" hummed! Everyone loved them, especially the pilots who flew them.
Here's a photo...
https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/142601/50826-usa-marine-corps-douglas-c-117/
Not a war bird - but
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JONkLEx6zeE
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD Not a war bird - but https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JONkLEx6zeE
Why, now that you mention it, at 0:42:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R55taADMUpY
12 o'clock high? B17 flew over our "air space" a few times during EAA last week.
.
Aluminum Overcast was providing rides during Oshkosh '19
https://www.eaa.org/shop/Flights/B17.aspx
This was from one of the day's USAF Heritage Flights
It may be just the angle of the photo but that B-17G looks like it has the shorter nose glass of a B-17E.
That may just be a B-17E nose glass. Sometimes restorers have to go with what parts and components are available, and not what they wish they could have.
It's a beauty just the same!
I don't want to hijack Dave Klepper's "Jack May" thread under the "Transit" column any more than I have already, so I'm putting this here where it should be.
Overmod and I had a discussion going about the SPAD XIII fighter from World War One, and I found a GOOD video about the building of a replica of the same.
It's an Italian video called "Ricostuzione Dello SPAD XIII."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz81eTwyWmQ
And here's the finished product in flight. I've probably posted this in the past.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74FbQLb-AqY
"Reconstruction of the SPAD XIII." Very good. But why spoil it with your gratuitous ethnic/immigrant insult?
It's OK Charlie, I'm half-Italian, I'm allowed!
Looks like you're the last guy to find out, I thought everyone knew by now.
For further reference, I'm half-Irish as well, so if I make "beer and potatoes" jokes I figure I'm allowed to do that as well.
No-one knows how to laugh at themselves like the Italians and the Irish do!
Language creates reality - that's why: stay respectful and friendly. This is the reality we want, isn't it? It doesn't matter if you are of full Italian ancestry or Irish or whatever. That sort of sophomoric, ethnic 'humor' has no value, especially now in a damaged world.
Point taken, but anyone who knows me from this site will tell you I've never hidden behind the anonymity of the Internet to insult or be cruel to anyone. I've shown a bit of anger from time to time, I'll admit that, but have alway stood behind what I've had to say.
Now that said, how about the stunning craftsmanship that went into that airplane?
Well said. I am quite certain you are not a bigot or a hate-filled person. My point is that in public discussions, such as on this forum, it is important to watch such language to keep our discourse civil. The coarsening of language is bad enough. Normalizing ehtnic/racial taunts should no longer be tolerated.
The SPAD was not, IMO, un bellissimo aereo, but it was a very effective fighter: fast, well-armed, relatively easy to fly, fairly sturdy and capable of taking a lot of shots and still flyable.
charlie hebdo Normalizing ethnic/racial taunts should no longer be tolerated.
Especially when, as here, the guy has built other full replica aircraft, including a Bleriot and a Wright Flyer, before this one. You might as well make fun of Hector Bugatti for the $21,000 oil change the unrelated Europeans charge for the Veyron oil change, in dialect.
I won't say that some dialect humor isn't still amusing ... but the punchline would have to depend heavily on the dialect (Norfolk, Virginia or spelling Mississippi come to mind), and even then if the intent is mocking or ethnically disparaging I'd concur with charlie that it really isn't funny any more.
I wouldn't have complained, but I have to jump in with moral support now that he's complained.
OK gents, I apologize if I offended ANYONE. Won't happen again. No more dialect humor.
I'll clean up the original post.
Now, thoughts on that SPAD construction video? Seeing how it was built I can understand how that airplane could take the punishment it did.
By the way, I got my answer as to what kind of engine was installed. Good choice!
As far as WW1 fighters are concerned some have said the Fokker D-7 was the best of them all, but in my opinion by 1918 they were all pretty darn good. As in any air combat from that time to this the victor was going to be the one who was the best pilot, tacticial, and marksman.
At Old Rhinebeck we have a SPAD VII copy with a Lycoming 0-320 as we need one airplane we can count on and fly to other venues. It has flown from New York to Air Venture at Oshkosh and back (well almost back–that is another story.) I'd post a picture, but don't have to patience to deal with all that. If you would like to see it, it is on our homepage slide show. www.oldrhinebeck.org Hope I have not violated any policies...we are a non-profit museum chartered by the State of NY.
Mike
Mike, I've seen videos of the Rhinebeck SPAD VII inflight, and it's gorgeous!
Maybe you can answer a question? Rhinebeck has an Albatros D-V. The Albatros fighters were a terror for a while, but by 1917 Von Richtofen was sick of them, calling them "...those lousy Albatroses!"
I know Rhinebeck's is a replica, but how good an airplane is it, how does it handle, and given the choice would any of your staff want to go into a fight with it against any other WW1 type?
The pilots generally love it. They think it would be very competitive, but the Triplane can outfly almost anything, and, then, along came the Fokker D VII, and that was all she wrote. Manfred got a lot of victories in the Alby. However, the D V did have a reputation for a structural problem in the lower wing. Our D Va copy has the short, stiffening strut, which seemed to solve it. Ours has a 200 hp Ranger until we can find another 150 Mercedes crankshaft. It is down for maintenance and we hope to have it back before the end of the season.
Thanks Mike! You see, I've always liked the streamlined, shark-like look of the Albatros, but of course looks aren't everything and if the Baron didn't like it at some point...
I don't doubt the Triplane can outfly almost anything, Von Richthofen was thrilled with it the first time he flew one. "It climbs like a monkey!"
Flintlock76Thanks Mike! You see, I've always liked the streamlined, shark-like look of the Albatros, but of course looks aren't everything and if the Baron didn't like it at some point...
Mike and charlie hebdo are probably the reigning experts here, so they may disagree, but my understanding was that aircraft were evolving so quickly and dramatically by early 1918 that rapid obsolescence could make even good earlier designs deadly to fly. I think mercifully we were spared what would have followed in 1919, in a great many respects, although I think it would have been interesting to see some of the resulting designs actually fly against each other.
... I don't doubt the Triplane can outfly almost anything, Von Richthofen was thrilled with it the first time he flew one. "It climbs like a monkey!"
More precisely, it can outturn almost anything, which in the brief days of dogfighting gave you a combat advantage. (See the Sopwith Tripe for the British version and its history) Problem is that it's bone slow anywhere else, including relative speed in an attempted dive, almost without regard to how much 'engine' you can put on it. As soon as tactics changed to rapid attack 'out of the sun' and speeds increased to where the ability to stay inside your opponent in a turn and bring guns to bear was less useful, most of the usefulness of a triplane as a fighting instrument was gone.
This for air-to-air 'knightly tourney' combat; people tend to forget that the major purpose of fighters in that war was not to engage other fighters but to intercept other forms of strategic air -- mostly reconnaissance and artillery-spotting, but the age of mass air bombardment was clearly getting under way (if still possessed of dubious 'throw weight' and actual tactical significance even in the last year of the War) and we could expect just the kind of interaction between 'little friends' for formation mass bombing missions that we came to see decades later using much more sophisticated engineering under similar 'evolutionary' pressure. Very different types of aircraft, flown differently, fulfil most escort missions.
Flintlock76 OK gents, I apologize if I offended ANYONE. Won't happen again. No more dialect humor. I'll clean up the original post. Now, thoughts on that SPAD construction video? Seeing how it was built I can understand how that airplane could take the punishment it did. By the way, I got my answer as to what kind of engine was installed. Good choice! As far as WW1 fighters are concerned some have said the Fokker D-7 was the best of them all, but in my opinion by 1918 they were all pretty darn good. As in any air combat from that time to this the victor was going to be the one who was the best pilot, tacticial, and marksman.
There is some positive consensus about the D.VII, though the British S.E.5a was a pretty effective machine as well, considerably faster than the Fokker:138mph vs 117 mph on a D.VII with the standard Mercedes D.IIIaü or 124 mph on D.VIIs equipped with the new BMW IIIa. The D.VII could "hang on its prop" which was useful in combat.
Overmodcharlie hebdo are probably the reigning experts here
No, I'm no expert. I became interested when a relative let me examine the war journal of an ancestor who had won the Blue Max for 44 vicories flying mainly a Fokker Eindecker, an Albatros D.III, a Pfalz D.III and a Fokker D.VII. Heady stuff for a 20-year old history major on his first journey abroad.
Like the controversy over how the Baron was brought down, the "best airplane" will never truly be resolved. It often depended on the pilot. If I had to pick: French: SPAD XIII, British: S.E.5 or Sopwith Snipe (often overlooked), German: Fokker D VII. The "great unknown" the Fokker D VIII (we have a copy with a 160 Gnome)–never saw combat, but was a game changer.
charlie hebdo Overmod charlie hebdo are probably the reigning experts here No, I'm no expert. I became interested when a relative let me examine the war journal of an ancestor who had won the Blue Max for 44 vicories flying mainly a Fokker Eindecker, an Albatros D.III, a Pfalz D.III and a Fokker D.VII. Heady stuff for a 20-year old history major on his first journey abroad.
Overmod charlie hebdo are probably the reigning experts here
Was that Hauptmann Rudolf Berthold by any chance?
Mike, I've read the Fokker D-VIII actually did see some combat, but only in the last weeks of the war, too late to make any significant impact.
One interesting thing about the D-VIII. I read an article in (I think) "Sport Aviation" magazine around 1970 by a gent named Swearingen who built a replica of a D-VIII. Mr. Swearingen went so far as to correspond with Rheinhold Platz, Fokker's chief designer and the man who designed the airplane to begin with, for any advice he could give. This was in the mid-sixties and Herr Platz was still alive at the time.
Herr Platz told Mr. Swearingen that he actually wanted to do a monoplane design in 1917, but this was the time the Luftstreitkraft wanted a triplane, having been very impressed by the performance of the Sopwith Triplane. So, the boss Tony Fokker said "Do me a triplane!" and as we all know what the boss wants, the boss gets!
Mr. Swearingen said it was a good collaboration, but sadly Herr Platz died before the replica was completed.
I was in high school when I read the article and never forgot it.
Oh, and Mr. Swearingen said the replica flew beautifully!
Steve SweeneyDigital Editor, Hobby
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.