Most fun flying...

[Boeingman]

Yes... They got -500's from Pan Am in 1985...

--03M

Thanks. Also, I 'm glad the memory is still intact. They say that it is the second thing that goes.

 

[A Squared]

What is it about a constellation that causes ordinarily sane, healthy men to become myopic and lose all aesthetic sense? Look at it, the airplane is gangly and awkward with this grotesque humpback, sort of a Quasimodo with wings. For pete's sake, the airplane's design was dictated, not by aerodynamics, but by the need to fit through someone's too small hangar doors, and it looks it. Compare to the DC-6's clean, utilitarian lines and purposeful look. There is an airplane which was designed to fly, not to fit in a hangar, and fly it does, I flew one yesterday, tomorrow I'll fly one again.

So, ask yourself, if the Constellation is really all it is made out to be, why aren't they flying anymore?

Oh, and put me down for the DC-3 training, they're still flying too.

 

[f9driver]

Tri-Star/UAL

Thrustmaster, UAL did fly the L1011. They got about 10 of them from Pan Am when they bought the Pacific Division.

 

[crash-proof]

What is it about a constellation that causes ordinarily sane, healthy men to become myopic and lose all aesthetic sense?

Your answer, sir...

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/155093/M/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/162340/M/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/162339/M/

http://www.metva.com.au/users/enno/photos/avalon/lconn2.jpg


I would however, LOVE to fly the DC-6.

 

[Vector4fun]

What is it about a constellation that causes ordinarily sane, healthy men to become myopic and lose all aesthetic sense? Look at it, the airplane is gangly and awkward with this grotesque humpback, sort of a Quasimodo with wings. For pete's sake, the airplane's design was dictated, not by aerodynamics, but by the need to fit through someone's too small hangar doors, and it looks it. Compare to the DC-6's clean, utilitarian lines and purposeful look. There is an airplane which was designed to fly, not to fit in a hangar, and fly it does, I flew one yesterday, tomorrow I'll fly one again.

FLAME BAIT!



Compairing the Connie's sexy curves to the DC-6's "clean utilitarian lines" is like compairing Jane Russel's curves to Patricia Neal's "utilitarian lines"; to use a period example. I suppose you find a Spitfire gangly also?

So, ask yourself, if the Constellation is really all it is made out to be, why aren't they flying anymore?

I asked myself that very question, and myself answered:

"Four very good reasons, Wright 3350s vs P&W 2800s. Same reason you don't see many clean, utilitarian DC-7s flying anymore neither."


BTW, Lockheed tried to change to R-2800s early in the program, when the 3350s had so many teething problems, but the Army insisted on waiting for the Wrights to work out...

 

[Thrust Master]

Re: Tri-Star/UAL

Thrustmaster, UAL did fly the L1011. They got about 10 of them from Pan Am when they bought the Pacific Division.

Thanks for the update, I did not know that.

In that case my chioce would be the Beech Skipper.

 

[A Squared]

FLAME BAIT!

Hehe, how did you know? Pot stirring aside, I really do find the Constellation rather unattractive. To me it looks like an overgrown Ercoupe with a bent back

"Compairing the Connie's sexy curves to the DC-6's "clean utilitarian lines" is like compairing Jane Russel's curves to Patricia Neal's "utilitarian lines"; to use a period example. "

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that if Jane Russell had an unnaturally hunched back and 3 asses, her film career wouldn't have been nearly as successful. Perhaps a better analogy would be that she wouldn’t have been quite as popular if, instead of those breasts, she had been equipped with brass milk spigots on top of her head so she would fit into the *existing* sweaters so that new sweaters wouldn’t have to be constructed.

"Four very good reasons, Wright 3350s vs P&W 2800s. Same reason you don't see many clean, utilitarian DC-7s flying anymore neither."

True, but the engine isn’t some sort of distantly removed entity, the choice of an engine is an integral part of what *makes* an airplane. If the P-51 hadn’t replaced the allison with the merlin, it would have never been anything more than a mediocre ground attack aircraft, a distant second to the P-47 (there’s that R-2800 again)

That being said, the DC-7, despite being saddled with the same engines, was operated commercially long, long after the Constellation became a museum curiosity, in fact there's still a few -7's operating out there

Douglas...........Lockheed
DC-3...............Hudson
DC-6...............Constellation
DC-10.............L-1011

All the Dougs are still flying, I'm betting there will still be a bunch of DC-10 operating when the last tri-star is parked.

 

[T-Gates]

I'm betting there will still be a bunch of DC-10 operating when the last tri-star is parked.

Dont make a grown man cry.... It's not nice....

 

[Vector4fun]

Hey A Squared,

All kidding aside, who's still operating a -7 and where? Haven't seen one in ages. I've actually seen more Connies lately. I saw one on the ramp at Salina Ks about six months ago as I drove by on 135. Don't believe it's in annual however...


Don't dis dem Lockheeds too much, the Air Force may be flying their C-130s around yr 2100 or so....



ps:

We actually worked DC-3 and CV-240 overflights yesterday....

 

[jsoceanlord]

a paraglider - but it seems sort of scary

 

[crash-proof]

Hey A Squared,

All kidding aside, who's still operating a -7 and where? Haven't seen one in ages.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/361956/M/

They use this one actively, the picture does not do the plane justice, it's in tip top shape!

 

[Typhoon1244]

So, ask yourself, if the Constellation is really all it is made out to be, why aren't they flying anymore?

I feel the same way about the 707. It was..and many say still is...a revolutionary airplane that forever changed the way we think about air travel. Truly a masterpiece. But outside of the military, they're gone.

And DC-8's are everywhere!

 

[VADriver]

A jet is a jet...

DC-3..done...

Got Connie?

 

[A Squared]

Hey A Squared,

All kidding aside, who's still operating a -7 and where?

In addidtion to the one posted by Crash-Proof, there's several being operated as an air tanker. I don't know by whom, but there's at least one on contract every summer in Alaska. There may be others hauling cargo in South America






[QUOTE".......CV-240 overflights yesterday.... [/QUOTE]

Hmmmm...there's those R-2800's again

 

[enigma]

Why are there not more Connies left? I don't know, but I have a theory, The Connie, like all Lougheeds was probably more expensive to begin with because it was much more complicated than its competition. This fact led to fewer being produced, and also led to much higher maintenance costs. It's pretty easy to understand that a complicated airframe and systems would be retired early.

Mr. Douglas' products on the other hand tend to be stone simple. As long as maintenance knows how to properly rig all the cables, a Douglas will last forever.

Here's a trivia question, Why did the Army Air Corps not utilize more P38s in WWII? It had great range, as proven by Lucky Lindy himself. Ask Yamamatos ghost. It was a great gunnery platform, Bong and Maguire both flew Lightnings. It was fast, decently manueverable and could get you home after suffering battle damage. Yet it wasn't as popular as other fighters. Why.

regards,
enigma

 

[A Squared]

........like all Lougheeds.....

OK, if you're gonna play that game, it was actually "Loughhead"

As for the trivia question; the p-38 was reputed to be much harder to bail out of safely, because of the horizontal stabilizer. This would tend to make it unpopular, but I'm not sure this would have much affect on military procurement.

 

[enigma]

OK, if you're gonna play that game, it was actually "Loughhead"

As for the trivia question; the p-38 was reputed to be much harder to bail out of safely, because of the horizontal stabilizer. This would tend to make it unpopular, but I'm not sure this would have much affect on military procurement.

double h, I should have rememmbered. Oh well.

The P38 was originally designed for an order of 50. As such, it wasn't engineered to be mass produced and required many more man hours to produce than its competitors. Not that that stopped production, because they were produced in fairly large numbers, but had they been simpler/cheaper, we would have had them earlier and in larger numbers. It's been a long time since I read this, it was in a Wings/Airpower magazine in the middle 70's.

reggards,
eniggma

 

[A Squared]

Actually, the double h was a typo on my part, it was really loughead. Anyway, that's interesting about the p-38, in a similar vein, i heard that the Merlin, outstanding engine that it was, was very expensive to manufacture originally. When RR licensed it to Packard they made some changes which allowed it to be manufactured much more cheaply, while still remaining essentially the same engine.

 

[enigma]

AA, that's an interesting tidbit about the merlin. I could certainly see where it could be true. I've always wondered if the merlins put in PT boats were of aircraft quality or if they had some lower spec parts. Any ideas?

Now if I could only remember how to spell Locheed.

regards,
DD

 

[A Squared]

I've always wondered if the merlins put in PT boats were of aircraft quality or if they had some lower spec parts. Any ideas?

no idea

Now if I could only remember how to spell Locheed.

Hmmmm, would that make the Connie the "Loch Heed Monster"?

Sorry <g>

AA

 

[RJFlyer]

I voted for the Connie, but would prefer the China Clipper...

 

[pilotyip]

P-38

The P-38 was not successful as a day fighter in the European Air War, it was outclassed by the German airplanes, and when damaged, probably lost due to liquid cooled engines damaged over enemy territory. In the pacific it was the top fighter for a shore based airplane, due to its range, speed, and fire power against an outclassed Japanese airplanes.