Author Topic: Military Air Transports  (Read 3001 times)

Offline earl1937

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Military Air Transports
« on: August 22, 2013, 03:42:39 PM »
 :airplane: A lot has been written and shown about the "war" birds which actually did the combat to defeat the Japanese and German forces, but seldom do you see the cargo and passenger aircraft which kept our military stocked and a full compliment of personell. I thought it might be useful to view some these aircraft and their capabilities.
The Lockheed Constellation ("Connie") is a propeller-driven airliner built by Lockheed Corporation between 1943 and 1958 at its Burbank, California, facility. A total of 856 aircraft were produced in numerous models, almost all powered by four 18-cylinder radial Wright R-3350 engines and distinguished by a triple-tail design and dolphin-shaped fuselage. The Constellation was used as a civilian airliner and as a U.S. military air transport, seeing service in the Berlin Airlift. It was the presidential aircraft for U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower.


This is a pic of one of the early models used during late 43 and through out the balance of the war.
The Constellation's wing design was close to that of the P-38 Lightning, differing mostly in scale. The distinctive triple tail kept the aircraft's height low enough to fit in existing hangars, while new features included hydraulically boosted controls and a thermal de-icing system used on wing and tail leading edges. The aircraft had a top speed of over 340 mph (550 km/h), faster than that of a Japanese Zero fighter, a cruise speed of 300 mph (480 km/h), and a service ceiling of 24,000 ft (7,300 m).
With the onset of World War II, the TWA aircraft entering production were converted to an order for C-69 Constellation military transport aircraft, with 202 aircraft intended for the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF). The first prototype (civil registration NX25600) flew on January 9, 1943, a short ferry hop from Burbank to Muroc Field for testing. Edmund T. "Eddie" Allen, on loan from Boeing, flew left seat, with Lockheed's own Milo Burcham as copilot. Rudy Thoren and Kelly Johnson were also on board.
After World War II the Constellation came into its own as a popular, fast, civilian airliner. Aircraft already in production for the USAAF as C-69 transports were finished as civilian airliners, with TWA receiving the first on 1 October 1945. TWA's first transatlantic proving flight departed Washington, DC, on December 3, 1945, arriving in Paris on December 4 via Gander and Shannon.
Trans World Airlines transatlantic service started on February 6, 1946 with a New York-Paris flight in a Constellation. On June 17, 1947 Pan American World Airways opened the first ever regularly scheduled round-the-world service with their L-749 Clipper America. The famous flight "Pan Am 1" operated until 1982.
As the first pressurized airliner in widespread use, the Constellation helped to usher in affordable and comfortable air travel. Operators of Constellations included TWA, Eastern Air Lines, Pan American World Airways, Air France, BOAC, KLM, Qantas, Lufthansa, Iberia Airlines, Panair do Brasil, TAP Portugal, Trans-Canada Air Lines (later renamed Air Canada), Aer Lingus, VARIG, Cubana de Aviación and Línea Aeropostal Venezolana.


 The Douglas DC-6 One of the great aircraft of all time and is still being used today by some freight companies around the world and one which I was typed rated in and had about 400 hours time in this great bird.
A crew which flew in the famous "Berlin Airlift" in C-54's.

Aviation history will still be recording and viewing the feats which the C-46 Commando did flying supplies and fuel over the "hump" between India and China. The one aircraft in which you did not have to fear turbulence around thunderstorms! You couldn't tear wings off this bird with a wreaking ball!

The world famous "Gooney Bird", flown by practically every nation in the world, both in Military uniform and civilian models.

While these are not all of the planes of "Fame" which did yoemans service for their respective countries and companies, the history behind these great aircraft would be interesting reading for any aviation buff!
« Last Edit: August 22, 2013, 03:51:49 PM by earl1937 »
Blue Skies and wind at my back and wish that for all!!!

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #1 on: August 23, 2013, 12:41:26 PM »
Earl, the C-54 was based on the DC-4. The DC-6 was the basis for the C-118.



I was qualified as a Flight Engineer after they transferred out my HU-16....



Replacements for the retired HU-16s were three C-131s.  



I crewed all three, including this one.







This aircraft was lost a few years later in an accident (fuel fire, compounded by pilot error).

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=2AEtAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tM4FAAAAIBAJ&dq=jacksonville&pg=2547%2C2652246
« Last Edit: August 23, 2013, 12:44:29 PM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #2 on: August 23, 2013, 01:52:46 PM »
They have a Connie on display down at LackLand AFB. I saw it again when I went back a few months ago for my kid. Its a beautiful and amazing aircraft.

"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline 715

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #3 on: August 23, 2013, 02:07:12 PM »
Sure would be nice to have a Connie in AH as a perked transport, say 15 troops, i.e. five spares if a few are killed, or two boxes of field sups.  (I suppose someone is going to point out that the service they saw in the last year of WWII was inconsequential and they shouldn't be added.)

Offline earl1937

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2013, 02:24:40 PM »
Earl, the C-54 was based on the DC-4. The DC-6 was the basis for the C-118.

(Image removed from quote.)

I was qualified as a Flight Engineer after they transferred out my HU-16....

(Image removed from quote.)

Replacements for the retired HU-16s were three C-131s.  

(Image removed from quote.)

I crewed all three, including this one.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

This aircraft was lost a few years later in an accident (fuel fire, compounded by pilot error).

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=2AEtAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tM4FAAAAIBAJ&dq=jacksonville&pg=2547%2C2652246
:airplane: I should have pointed that out in my post, as that is an important point to make about these two fine a/c. I sometimes forget that everybody in here doesn't go back as far and you and I.
Blue Skies and wind at my back and wish that for all!!!

Offline morfiend

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10435
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2013, 03:03:24 PM »
:airplane: I should have pointed that out in my post, as that is an important point to make about these two fine a/c. I sometimes forget that everybody in here doesn't go back as far and you and I.


  Earl,

  My first flight was in a Vickers viscount....... not quite as.errrr experienced as you nor do I have your qualifications!


    :salute

Offline earl1937

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2013, 06:03:06 PM »

  Earl,

  My first flight was in a Vickers viscount....... not quite as.errrr experienced as you nor do I have your qualifications!


    :salute
:airplane: One of the truly great early airliners built by the Vickers Aircraft corp.

This aircraft was one of the early aircraft with a pilot "friendly" cockpit layout!

Hadn't thought about this aircraft in long time! Used to be a lot of them flying all over the world!
Blue Skies and wind at my back and wish that for all!!!

Offline earl1937

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #7 on: August 23, 2013, 06:05:06 PM »
Earl, the C-54 was based on the DC-4. The DC-6 was the basis for the C-118.

(Image removed from quote.)

I was qualified as a Flight Engineer after they transferred out my HU-16....

(Image removed from quote.)

Replacements for the retired HU-16s were three C-131s.  

(Image removed from quote.)

I crewed all three, including this one.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

This aircraft was lost a few years later in an accident (fuel fire, compounded by pilot error).

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=2AEtAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tM4FAAAAIBAJ&dq=jacksonville&pg=2547%2C2652246
:airplane: Is that a 340 or 440?
Blue Skies and wind at my back and wish that for all!!!

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #8 on: August 23, 2013, 08:18:17 PM »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2013, 06:39:22 AM »
Bristol Britannia > Canadair CL-44 (CC-106 Yukon)



Developed from the Britannia was the CP-107 Argus.

morf,

Vickers Vanguard. Not sure if it saw military service tho.

Some others:
Lockheed L-188 Electra
Antonov An-10
Antonov An-12
Ilyushin Il-18

Offline earl1937

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2013, 07:37:01 AM »
Bristol Britannia > Canadair CL-44 (CC-106 Yukon)

(Image removed from quote.)

Developed from the Britannia was the CP-107 Argus.

morf,

Vickers Vanguard. Not sure if it saw military service tho.

Some others:
Lockheed L-188 Electra
Antonov An-10
Antonov An-12
Ilyushin Il-18
:airplane: All of these aircraft, as you correctly point out, did an outstanding job for their respective countries. A little note about the Lockheed Electra, which many airlines used for many, many years! The Electra had a serious problem when first introduced to service and several crashed prior to the NTSB,, (old CAB investigators were in use when this happened), They finally figured out that the two outboard engines, #1 and #4, when the aircraft exceeded 340 knots, which they did in normal level cruise flight.. The two engines in question, because of gyro action, induced by the 4 bladed props, would begin an oscillation, which would cause the engines to tear off the wing and of course the aircraft would crash. For many months, all the airlines were restricted to no more than 275 knots, if I recall correctly, until a fix was installed to correct the problem. Following text is reports from the old Civil Aeronautics Board, which was charged with airline accidents at that time.



 a Lockheed L-188 Electra, registration N9705C, was a scheduled domestic flight from Houston, Texas, bound for New York with scheduled stops in Dallas and Washington, D.C.. On September 29, 1959, 23 minutes into the 41-minute flight from Houston to Dallas Love Field, the aircraft disintegrated in midair approximately 3.8 miles (6.1 km) southeast of Buffalo, Texas killing everyone on board.

Identifying the cause of the disaster proved difficult, as the accident had occurred before the age of cockpit voice recorders. The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) investigated the accident and, after interviewing numerous eyewitnesses and examining the debris field, were able to conclude that the initial failure of the aircraft had begun in the left wing. However, even though it was determined that the wing was destroyed by "cycles of reverse bending" or "flutter", the investigation failed to determine how the flutter was caused, and the investigation stalled.

In the six months following the accident further progress towards identifying the cause of the flutter was unsuccessful and the case remained unsolved. The breakthrough into unlocking the cause of the accident came after the crash of Northwest Airlines Flight 710 on March 17, 1960. The two aircraft, both Electra's, disintegrated in midair after losing their wings in similar fashion, both resulting in the deaths of all occupants on board. The investigation into the Northwest crash discovered a new phenomenon of harmonic coupling within the wings of aircraft, which in the end was ultimately identified by the CAB as being the cause of both breakups. The final accident report for Flight 542 was issued on April 28, 1961.

Civil Aeronautics Board investigators arrived on the scene the morning following the accident. The left wing was found a mile away from the potato field in which most of the other pieces of aircraft lay, and the pieces of the right wing were scattered in a widespread debris field across the countryside.

Investigation determined that the breakup of the plane had begun in the left wing and progressed in a catastrophic sequence which ultimately destroyed the aircraft. However, the reason for the disintegration of the left wing proved to be elusive. Tests found that "flutter" had destroyed the wing, however the Electra's wings were supposedly flutter-free. Further tests attempting to recreate the accident by weakening the wing and exposing it to loads greater than any which would conceivably have occurred in the actual flight failed to cause a breakup similar to the one that occurred in Flight 542. Help from teams at Boeing, Convair, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also failed to determine how Lockheed's "flutter-free" wing had simply ripped away during flight, and the investigation stalled, further progress not being achieved for nearly six months.

Renewal of interest in finding the cause for the Braniff Flight 542 crash occurred after Northwest Airlines Flight 710, another Electra model aircraft of the same kind as Flight 542, disintegrated in-flight and crashed near Tell City, Indiana on March 17, 1960. Following the second crash, CAB Chief Safety investigator, Phillip Goldstein, was reported as saying: "The structure was subjected to forces greater than it was designed for. We have definite evidence of a wing failure. Why this wing failure, I don't know."

Initial investigations into the second crash proved fruitless but after laborious testing investigators were able to find flaws in the aircraft which included an overly stiff wing, and outboard nacelles responding differently than intended in the design briefs. Further experimentation discovered that flutter in a nacelle can be passed on to even a "flutter-free" wing. Final work in the mystery also found that as the magnitude of the flutter grows, the frequency at which it vibrates decreases. In the case of the two Electra crashes the frequency of the flutter had lowered from five cycles a second to three, the same as the wing creating harmonic coupling. This harmonic coupling would have continued to cause ever larger wing vibrations until some part of the structure failed. Contributing to the two aircraft's demise was the stiffness of the wings and severe clear-air turbulence. Final analysis of the CAB, in its official Accident Report:
ConclusionThere was in this investigation no positive indication of the cause. For this reason, an attempt has been made in this report to eliminate certain possibilities by application of the available evidence to each of them. Once these possibilities have been disposed of, the only remaining causal factor for which there is some known basis is the condition of whirl mode. The probability that this accident was so caused is supported by the following.1. So far as is known, the aircraft was in straight and level flight and at a normal cruise speed with no serious mechanical problems.2. A sound identified as a supersonic or high speed propeller occurred 30 seconds prior to fuel ignition (wing failure).3. There was structural damage evidence compatible with oscillatory motion of the No. 1 QEC and the left wing.4. First stage compressor blades of No. 1 engine rubbed the air inlet housing supports.5. The probable cause of a similar accident of another Electra was due to whirl mode.If prior damage is a requirement for the necessary reduction in stiffness, it must be assumed that the evidence of such damage was either obliterated in the crash or never existed in a discernible form.Probable CauseThe Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was structural failure of the left wing resulting from forces generated by undampened propeller whirl mode.
The final reports into the two accidents were released four days apart, on April 24 and April 28, 1961 respectively, with the Braniff crash report being the later of the two. Both reports were similar and blamed the same forces for destroying both aircraft. I have not been able to find the "fix" in official lingo, but if I remember correctly, the "fix" was cutting 8.5 inches of length off of the props, which stopped the occalation of the engine nacelles, which was the cause of the wing failures.

To Lockheeds credit and engineers who investigated this great aircraft, an aircraft was born out of this, which is still in use today, the "P-3" Orion.



Role
Maritime patrol aircraft

National origin
United States

Manufacturer
Lockheed
Lockheed Martin

First flight
November 1959

Introduction
August 1962

Status
Active

Primary users
United States Navy
Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force
Royal Australian Air Force
Brazilian Air Force

Number built
Lockheed – 650,
 Kawasaki – 107,
Total – 757

Unit cost
US$36 million (FY1987)

Developed from
Lockheed L-188 Electra

Variants
Lockheed AP-3C Orion
Lockheed CP-140 Aurora
Lockheed EP-3
Lockheed WP-3D Orion

Developed into
Lockheed P-7

The Lockheed P-3 Orion is a four-engine turboprop anti-submarine and maritime surveillance aircraft developed for the United States Navy and introduced in the 1960s. Lockheed based it on the L-188 Electra commercial airliner. The aircraft is easily recognizable by its distinctive tail stinger or "MAD Boom", used for the magnetic detection of submarines.

Over the years, the aircraft has seen numerous design advancements, most notably to its electronics packages. The P-3 Orion is still in use by numerous navies and air forces around the world, primarily for maritime patrol, reconnaissance, anti-surface warfare and anti-submarine warfare. A total of 734 P-3s have been built, and during 2012, it joined the handful of military aircraft including the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress and Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker that have served 50 years of continuous use by the United States military. The U.S. Navy's remaining P-3C aircraft will eventually be replaced by the Boeing P-8A Poseidon

« Last Edit: August 24, 2013, 08:59:29 AM by earl1937 »
Blue Skies and wind at my back and wish that for all!!!

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2844
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2013, 12:44:00 PM »
Axis still miss the most used plane Tante JU-52
My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline colmbo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
      • Photos
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2013, 04:36:06 PM »
In June of '83 a Reeve Aleution Airways Electra departed Cold Bay, Alaska headed to Seattle (IIRC).  The crew noticed a vibration, before they could trouble-shoot it the prop and gearbox of the #4 engine tore off the nacelle moving left and hitting the lower intake on the #3 engine before continuing to the left and sawing a huge slice through the lower fuselage at the wing leading edge.  Elevator control cables, throttle cables and some other systems were damaged.  The crew was able to use trim to control pitch, the power was stuck at "cruise", flaps limited in deployment, and they did not have brakes or nose-wheel steering.  The huge gap in the fuselage was allowing the fuselage to flex.  IIRC there was a crew of 4 or 5 and 11 passengers on the aircraft.

They diverted to Anchorage where they were able to make a safe landing.  Since they had no throttle control they shut-down and feathered the #2 engine to reduce thrust.  They would "fly" the airplane onto the runway, shutdown the remaining engines and do pilot stuff to steer and get her stopped.  I was in a crash truck at the approach end of the runway, the first approach they were very fast and just a bit high.  As they passed my position I pulled out to chase and was heartbroken because I knew they weren't going to be able to land/stop on the runway.  We had been told the gear would be lowered by emergency means so the last thing I expected was a go around by a damaged 4 engine airplane flying with limited controls and 2 engines.  It was a wonderful sight to see the Electra pitch up slightly and the gear start retracting.  They made a low, wide pattern and the second approach was flown lower and appeared slower.  They were able to get the airplane on the ground about 1/2 way down the 10,000 runway.  They shut the engines off and set the emergency brake system locking the main-wheels causing a fire to start in the tires as they scrubbed on the pavement.  As the airplane slowed and they lost rudder control the Electra drifted to the left off the runway (the dirt putting most of the wheelfire out) and came to a stop with the nose wheel dropping into a drainage ditch.  The crew and pax evacuated (the flight deck crew taking the time to put their jackets and caps on) with no injuries to anyone.  Woohoo!

A Youtube video taken by a friend of mine of the landing.   The audio is the actual radio coms but isn't dubbed at the correct times for all of it.....the female dispatcher was a great gal....once pulled me out of a burning fuselage....ah the memories.

I really do have to go through my steamer trunk and get some of my old photos scanned in.  I have several of the Reeve Electra as well as pics of the DC-10/Piper Navajo collision and the JAL 747 that landed and hit one of our field maintenance pickups that was doing a runway check.  (FYI, I don't care what you Ford guys say an F-150 will not carry a 747)
Columbo

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

Fate whispers to the warrior "You cannot withstand the storm" and the warrior whispers back "I AM THE STORM"

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2013, 07:14:54 PM »
Didn't that air crash TV program do a episode on that a/c?

Offline Chalenge

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15179
Re: Military Air Transports
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2013, 07:46:28 PM »
One of the great "could-have-been" aircraft (I think) is the Hughes H-4. For all the grief that Hughes took over that plane it was very telling that he mothballed it with such care. Even if detractors were correct and it could never fly out of ground effect (not actually proven) it was still a great aircraft. Being made of wood it was at least hard to see on radar, but in ground effect it would never be seen except by surface ships. It had enough wingspan to operate above "dangerous wave" levels while remaining in ground effect, and because it had the range it did it could remain in ground effect and remain more cost effective than any type then or since. The technique that Hughes created to construct the aircraft would have led to a large fleet of H-4s built faster than any riveted type as well. Too bad it was late for the war.
If you like the Sick Puppy Custom Sound Pack the please consider contributing for future updates by sending a months dues to Hitech Creations for account "Chalenge." Every little bit helps.