Va vol 38 no 5 may 2010 by EAA Vintage Aircraft Association

MAY 2010

STRAIGHT & LEVEL GEOFF ROBISON PRESIDENT, VINTAGE AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION

Airport security ecently, EAA’s Office of Industry and Regulatory Affairs submitted nearly 50 pages of comments to the FAA regarding its proposed policy on airport access, including the very hot topic of “through-the-fence” authorizations. This issue has proven to be a “near to the heart” regulatory potential game changer for many of our members all over this country. The comments submitted as part of the official record in the Federal Register were developed by EAA’s staff at the FAA’s invitation following a meeting with the agency’s top airport officials in Oshkosh this past February. Three primary concerns: 1. Clarification of adjacent residential through-the-fence agreements. 2. Accessibility to public-use general-aviation airports by recreational pilots and enthusiasts. 3. Improving support for aviation activities, including availability of ethanol-free premium autogas, support for owner self-service maintenance, and clarification of airport reduced fair-market value rent opportunities for EAA chapters. Of course we are all very hopeful that we, EAA, can successfully influence the ultimate outcome of the final rules related to these membercritical issues. By now, a lot of you have already heard this news in any number of aviation publications, and you are likely asking yourself, “Why is this news so relevant to us today?” My personal concern lies in the fact that we, as users of the many public-use airports around the country, have a real responsibility to continuously convince the FAA that we can be trusted to act prudently in all facets of general aviation (GA).

We need to start by dialing up our attitude about the importance of the existing rules. We need to reconsider the importance of these seemingly small rules and change our attitude about what level of compliance we currently practice on a daily basis. Airport security really is an important and relevant issue to us all. If we cannot be entrusted to follow the most basic of these rules, how can we possibly convince the federal government that we can be entrusted to “operate through the fence?” Very few of my pilot friends have a bad attitude toward these simple rules, but a fair number of them really do need to “dial it up a bit” when it comes to respecting these rules for what they are intended to prevent. We all know that the broader media virtually has a feeding frenzy with any negative news story involving general aviation. We are an entity that truly enjoys an excellent rapport with the FAA, and we really have the potential to make a difference here. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Airport Watch program (http://www.aopa.org/ airportwatch/) is a great model, and we would all be wise to practice the tools this model program preaches. If we all take a proactive role in securing GA, we will all be much better prepared to avoid the negative frontpage media coverage even if something does go horribly wrong at our airports. Winning the public-opinion war is the name of the game. Safeguarding, defending, and otherwise jealously protecting GA from anyone or anything that may do it harm must become part of our culture if we intend to continue to enjoy the freedoms and benefits we all take

pleasure in from private, personal air transportation. So let’s all consider “dialing it up a bit.” You can check out the full content of EAA’s comments filed with the FAA at http:// www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/ home.html#documentDetail?R=090 0006480acd6b7 EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2010 continues to develop into yet another world-class event. The most recently announced arrivals include a very early model of the Harrier Jump Jet. This aircraft, the only civilianowned example of one in the aviation community, is a BAe Sea Harrier F/A2 owned by retired Marine Lt. Col. Art Nalls. He bases this aircraft at St. Mary’s County airport in Maryland. The aircraft was purchased from a broker who got it surplus from Britain’s Royal Navy. Boy, imagine the pile of paperwork the lieutenant colonel filed with the FAA to get this bird in the air! This aircraft should prove to be a real crowd pleaser at this year’s event. Be sure to bring your earplugs for this one, especially for those young ears, because when they fire those RollsRoyce Pegasus Mk.106 engines, we’ll all know what that noise is. The other major recent announcement was the news that we’ll have something we’ve not had in the evening after the sun goes down in Oshkosh. For the first time in our history, EAA will be hosting a night air show on Saturday night. If you have never witnessed a night air show, you won’t want to miss this one. It’s certain to be spectacular. “You just gotta be there! See you at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh—July 26-August 1, 2010

A I R P L A N E Vol. 38, No. 5

2010

M AY

CONTENTS IFC Straight & Level Airport security by Geoff Robison

News

One Gorgeous Taylorcraft From Basket Case to Award Winner

“America’s most modern low-priced airplane” by Sparky Barnes Sargent

The Douglas DC-3 75 years of service: Part 1 by Henry M. Holden

Light Plane Heritage Joseph L. Cato—Nearly a Legend by Owen S. Billman

My Friend Albert Vollmecke Part 5 by Robert G. Lock

The Vintage Mechanic Continental W-670 main bearing failures, Part II by Robert G. Lock

Mystery Plane by H.G. Frautschy

The Vintage Instructor Landings—forced and otherwise by Steve Krog, CFI

Classified Ads

COVERS FRONT COVER: Restorers Mark McGowan of Plymouth, Michigan, and Ken Kreutzfeld of Por t Clinton, Ohio, took 14 years to complete their restoration of a 1940 Taylorcraft BL-50. It’s now a BC65 with a Continental A-65 replacing the 50-hp Lycoming decades ago. Read all about it in Sparky Barnes-Sargent’s ar ticle beginning on page 4. EAA photo by Tyson Rininger. BACK COVER: The creation of the DC-3 star ts with the redesign of the DC-2 into a widebody version for use by American Airlines as the DST, or Douglas Sleeper Transpor t. With 16 ber ths for sleeping during an overnight transcontinental journey, the DST could also be configured to carr y 24 passengers in seats during the day. It was the dawn of a new era in commercial aviation. The photo shows the prototype DST, NX14988, over the western United States. Only the DST has small windows intended for each ber th above ever y other window in the cabin. A three-par t series written by DC-3 historian Henr y Holden begins in this issue. EAA Archive photo.

STAFF EAA Publisher Director of EAA Publications Executive Director/Editor Production/Special Project Photography Copy Editor

12 Tom Poberezny Mary Jones H.G. Frautschy Kathleen Witman Jim Koepnick Bonnie Kratz Colleen Walsh

Publication Advertising: Manager/Domestic, Sue Anderson Tel: 920-426-6127 Email: sanderson@eaa.org Fax: 920-426-4828 Manager/European-Asian, Willi Tacke Phone: +49(0)1716980871 Email: willi@flying-pages.com Fax: +49(0)8841 / 496012

Coordinator/Classified, Lesley Poberezny Tel: 920-426-6563 Email: classads@eaa.org

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 1

VAA NEWS Pitcairn Autogiro, Sikorsky Top Antique Awards at Sun ’n Fun

VAA Flightline Safety Operations Building Replacement Thanks in large part to a generous contribution by a longtime Vintage Aircraft Association (VAA) member, this year’s upgrade to the VAA facilities on the EAA AirVenture Oshkosh grounds includes a new building to accommodate one of the largest groups of volunteers during the convention, the Flightline Safety crew. From the moment an airplane exits the runway next to the Vintage area until it is safely shut down in its parking spot, the Flightline Safety volunteers handle the aircraft and its pilot every step of the way. From confirming its eligibility to park in the area using a combination of computer lookup and radio communications, to the dispatching of scooter-mounted aircraft marshalers who guide each airplane into a parking location, there’s plenty of coordinated activity to ensure it all goes smoothly and safely. For many years these volunteers have operated out of a small shack that has had to absorb activities such as computer operations, radio dispatch, and a gathering/rest location for the fl ightline volunteers. The building was beginning to literally rot out from underneath them, so the decision was made to replace the building with a new structure that will accommodate all those demands plus serve as secure storage for much of the equipment needed to support flightline operations. The new structure was built during the first VAA work week-

2 MAY 2010

According to reports from members who attended the event, Jack Tiffany and Jim Hammond’s 1932 Pitcairn PA-18 Autogiro took top honors as the Grand Champion Antique at the Sun ’n Fun Fly-In at Lakeland, Florida, while the Sikorsky S-39 restored by Dick and Patsy Jackson was selected as the Reserve Grand Champion. There was no Grand Champion Classic award presented at Sun ’n Fun. The judges at the event chose to present an award that is not recognized within the EAA Official Judging Standards Manual, the Sun ’n Fun Grand Champion Custom Classic; it was given to an Aeronca 7AC Champ owned by Richard Hardy of Lakeland, Florida. The same was true in the Contemporary category, with the awarding of the Sun ’n Fun Grand Champion Custom Contemporary prize. It was presented to a Piper PA-24-400 owned by W. Lee Hussey II, Martinsville, Virginia. For the entire awards list, visit Sun ’n Fun’s website at www.Sun-N-Fun.org. Click on the Fly-In tab at the top, and then look for the Event Activities tab to locate the Aircraft Judging page. end of the year, April 22-25. More than 35 volunteers spent a cool and sometimes rainy weekend raising the walls and getting it under roof before the rain set in later on Saturday. At the same time, a group of electrically talented volunteers added a donated set of high-bay lighting fixtures to the Vintage Hangar. Flashlights will no longer be required equipment for the type clubs during inclement weather! Completion of the Flightline Safety building will take place during the next two work weekends, May 21-23 and June 25-27. If you’re interested in volunteering during a work weekend, please contact Michael Blombach at 260-433-5101 or michael846@aol.com. We can’t promise you glory, but we’ll sure feed you well (thanks to the efforts of directors Bob Lumley and Steve Nesse!), and we’ll even give you a hat!

100th Anniversary of the Seaplane On March 28, 1910, Frenchman Henri Fabre flew his aeroplane Le Canard for the fi rst time, taking of f from the sur face of the Golfe deFos near Marseille, marking the invention of the seaplane. Fabre, who lived to the age of 101, dying in 1984, was a marine engineer who had an interest in aviation. His ungainly canard aircraft is acknowledged as the first powered seaplane to lift of f the water under its own power. Join the seaplane enthusiasts at the EAA Seaplane Base during EAA AirVenture Oshkosh to celebrate this milestone.

2010 VAA Friends of the Red Barn Campaign The VAA annual fundraising campaign fuels VAA action Don’t wait for a mailing from VAA HQ before you send in your contribution— to keep our administration costs as low as possible, we’re not sending out a mailing to each VAA member. Please send your donation today, while it’s fresh in your mind! Please help the VAA and our nearly 500 dedicated volunteers make this an unforgettable experience for our many EAA AirVenture guests. Your contribution now really does make a difference. There are seven levels of gifts and gift recognition. Thank you for whatever you can do. Here are some of the many activities the Friends of the Red Barn fund underwrites: • Red Barn Information Desk Supplies • Flightline Parking Scooters and Supplies • Breakfast for Past Grand Champions • Participant Plaques and Supplies • Volunteer Booth Administrative Supplies • Signs Throughout the Vintage Area • Toni’s Red Carpet Express Van and Radios • Red Barn and Other Building Maintenance • And More! Caps for VAA Volunteers Tall Pines Café Dining Tent • •

Please help the VAA make EAA AirVenture Oshkosh an unforgettable experience for our many guests. Become a Friend of the Red Barn. Contribution Levels Diamond Plus

Diamond $1,000

$1,250

EAA VIP Center

Platinum $750

Gold $500

Silver $250

Bronze $100

Loyal Supporter $99 & Under

2 people/Full Week 2 people/2 Days

2 people/1 Day

Full Week

★

2 Tickets

1 Ticket

2 People/Full Wk

1 Person/Full Wk

Donor Appreciation Certificate

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

★ ★ ★

★

Name Listed: Vintage Airplane Magazine, Website, and Sign at Red Barn

★

VIP Air Show Seating Close Auto Parking Two Tickets to VAA Picnic Tri-Motor Certificate Breakfast at Tall Pines Café Special FORB Cap Two Passes to VAA Volunteer Party Special Friends of the Red Barn Badge Access to VAA Volunteer Center

✃

2 Days

VAA Friends of the Red Barn

Name______________________________________________________________________EAA #___________ VAA #___________ (Please print your name the way you would like it to appear on your badge.) Address______________________________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/ZIP________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone___________________________________________________E-Mail______________________________________________ Please choose your level of participation: ____ Diamond Plus - $1,250.00 ____ Diamond Level Gift - $1,000.00 ____ Platinum Level Gift - $750.00

____ Gold Level Gift - $500.00 ____ Silver Level Gift - $250.00 ____ Bronze Level Gift - $100.00

____ Loyal Supporter Gift - ($99.00 or under) Your Support $_______

■ Payment enclosed (Make checks payable to Vintage Aircraft Assoc.) ■ Please charge my credit card (below)

Mail your contribution to:

VAA FORB PO Box 3086 Credit Card Number __________________________ Expiration Date _________ OSHKOSH, WI 54903-3086 Signature_________________________________________

*Do you or your spouse work for a matching-gift company? If so, this gift may qualify for a matching donation. Please ask your human resources department for the appropriate form.

Name of Company __________________________________________________________

or donate online at: www.vintageaircraft.org/ programs/redbarn.html

The Vintage Aircraft Association is a nonprofit educational organization under IRS 501c3 rules. Under federal law, the deduction from federal income tax for charitable contributions is limited to the amount by which any money (and the value of any property other than money) contributed exceeds the value of the goods or services provided in exchange for the contribution. An appropriate receipt acknowledging your gift will be sent to you for IRS gift reporting reasons.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 3

One Gorgeous Taylorcraft From Basket Case to Award Winner TYSON REININGER

4 MAY 2010

“America’s most modern low-priced airplane” by Sparky Barnes Sargent

was as brilliant as a beacon on the flightline at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2009, and this exceptionally restored 1940 Taylorcraft led appreciative admirers back to a time before World War II, when the lightplane business was thriving and Taylorcrafts were one of the top-selling models. Restorers Mark McGowan of Plymouth, Michigan, and Ken Kreutzfeld of Port Clinton, Ohio, happily answered questions about the airplane, which they took 14 years to restore. An original black trim scheme accented its glossy vermilion finish, and the fine details of this prewar airplane—from its Taylorcraft compass right down to its Boots nuts—denoted authenticity. NC24371 was manufactured by the Taylorcraft Aviation Corporation in Alliance, Ohio. On March 18, 1940, the new flying machine climbed aloft, powered by its humble 50-hp Lycoming O-145-A1. Young William A. Crawford, a company test pilot with about 570 hours of flying time, put the BL-50 through its paces for 45 minutes. Satisfied that all was well with the airplane, he landed and taxied the Taylorcraft trainer to the ramp. Business was brisk that spring, and serial

number 1707 sold just three days later to the Lubbock Aero Club of Texas, where it was based until 1953. In more recent times, an aviator named John Munch acquired the Taylorcraft in 1969 and re-covered it in 1972. In 1984, his heir at law sold the airplane to the EAA Aviation Foundation, and the following year, the foundation sold it to Jun Morris and Kelly O’Brien. Ken went with Jun to Hales Corners, Wisconsin, and helped him haul the airplane back to Ohio. “We put it together and flew it for a year, and then Jun wanted to rebuild it, so he took it apart—but then he moved to California, so he sold the airplane to Denny Wittenmeyer in 1988. Denny did some tubing repairs and put it in his garage, where it sat for quite a number of years until Mark and I bought it,” recalls Ken, adding with a laugh, “Denny ‘inspired’ us to buy it—he worked me for two or three years to buy it. Mark and I divvied out the project and started working on it.” Though their restoration work commenced immediately, they had numerous stop-and-go moments throughout the years, when they’d had enough and simply pushed it back in a corner. Later, with renewed interest, they’d drag it back

out and start working on it again. They obtained drawings from the Taylorcraft Foundation Inc. and methodically documented the entire process with photographs. In fact, they worked on the project long enough that technology progressed from film media to digital media. By October 2007, Mark became the sole owner of NC24371, though Ken continued working with him until the airplane was fully restored. Its first flight was June 22, 2009—and Ken gleefully placed a phone call to Mark, who was in Japan at the time, to tell him the Taylorcraft was flying just fine. Mark had to wait for two weeks until he returned to the States for his first Taylorcraft flight. “Ken did that on purpose,” says Mark, laughing good-naturedly.

Taylorcraft B Series The Taylorcraft B series had similar airframes, but they were powered by different engines. The 1940 Taylorcraft was available with Lycoming 50 to 65 hp, Continental 50 to 65 hp, and Franklin 50 to 60 hp. The new trainer version offered side-by-side seating and interchangeable wheel or stick controls. The B models were priced from $1,495 and up, according to SPARKY BARNES SARGENT

This rear view of the Taylorcraft reveals its clean lines. VINTAGE AIRPLANE 5

The “basket case” fuselage, in sad shape before the restoration.

SPARKY BARNES SARGENT

MARK McGOWAN

The diagonally painted stripes on the prop tips are original to this new-old-stock prop.

New ribs being installed on the aileron.

MARK McGOWAN

The aileron, with the fabric removed.

The five-tuck spliced cable was fabricated by Andrew King.

MARK McGOWAN

MARK McGOWA McGOWAN WAN WA AN N

Close-up view of the newly fabricated left rudder cable and the drawing. 6 MAY 2010

The restored wing and aileron. nal An original ey McCauley go. logo.

MARK McGOWAN PHOTOS

Exploded view of the brake parts.

The assembled brake parts.

Newly fabricated control cables and restored control columns, ready to be installed in the cabin.

The powder-coated fuselage, with new wood stringers. a March 1940 ad. The approved type certificates (ATC) for the B series were issued in 1938, and each model had its own ATC. For example, the BL (Lycoming) was built under ATC No. 700 (9-22-1938), the BF (Franklin) was built under ATC No. 699 (9-19-1938), and the BC (Continental) was built in accordance with ATC No. 696 (8-241938). NC24371 began life as a model BL-50, and apparently sometime during the late 1940s or early 1950s, a 65-hp Continental engine was installed, since records show it listed as a BC-65 model around that time. Today, it is still powered by a Continental A-65-8. (There are 172 BC-65 models listed on the FAA Registry to date, and no BL-50 models.) The earlier B models still had exposed cylinders, but later models were streamlined with a fully enclosed cowl. The wings had spruce spars and metal ribs, with metal leading edges. The Warren-trusstype welded-steel-tube fuselage was faired with wooden stringers, and the tail was built of welded steel tubing. A distinguishing feature was a pair of Flettner trim tabs, which were mounted on the fuselage beneath the horizontal stabilizers. The Taylorcraftâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lovely

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 7

SPARKY BARNES SARGENT PHOTOS

Above: Kreutzfeld overhauled this Continental A-65-8 engine. Left: Mark McGowan and Ken Kreutzfeld took 14 years to restore this 1940 Taylorcraft from a basket case to an award winner.

The instrument panel is dominated by the large tachometer/engine instrument combination in the center.

Close-up view of one of the two Flettner trim tabs that are mounted on the fuselage beneath the horizontal stabilizer. 8 MAY 2010

wings spanned 36 feet, and the airplane measured 22 feet in length. Weighing 640 pounds empty, it had a useful load of 510 pounds. A 12gallon fuel tank was inside the cabin between the instrument panel and firewall, and an optional auxiliary 6-gallon tank could be installed aft of the seats. It lifted off the runway in less than 400 feet and climbed out at 620 fpm. It could cruise at 95 mph (max speed of 105 mph) for 250 miles, and when it was time to land, it touched down softly on its rubber shock cord gear at 35 mph. Those shock cords were installed at the top of the landing gear struts and were neatly faired to the fuselage—just one more example of Taylorcraft streamlining. Mechanical brakes, Shinn wheels, and a fullswiveling tail wheel were standard; a steerable tail wheel was optional. A company ad in Aero Digest promoted the Taylorcraft B series as “America’s most modern low-priced airplane,” boasting that “it has what it takes to win your choice. A thrilling sight and a marvelous flight await you in the new 1940 Taylorcraft, now ready for your inspection. You’ll instantly enthuse over the sleek new cowling so beautiful and modern in design – the relaxful [sic] comfort of chair height seating – the two doors – the generous room – the new adjustable ventilators –

TYSON REININGER

and the increase of 50 lbs. in useful load capacity . . . You’ll be amazed by the cabin quietness resulting from scientific sound-proofing and the newly engineered single undercabin exhaust which reduces motor noise to a smooth rhythmic purr… Yes – and the quick, eager response to the controls – the fine balance and handling ease – the buoyant lift and snappy pick-up will truly delight you with Taylorcraft performance . . . Add to all this the fact that Taylorcraft’s safety record is first in its class.”

sq. ft. to about 72,000 sq. ft. Considerable additional machinery and equipment were added and the enlarged plant laid out for more efficient flow of production. The productive capacity of the company

“Everything was a challenge on a prewar

Booming Prewar Business Taylorcraft Aviation Corporation took orders for 1,017 airplanes in 1940—compared to 487 the previous year, according to the Aircraft Year Book (1941). Since Taylorcraft was dealing with an increasing backlog of incoming orders in 1940, the company “. . . erected additions to the plant and a new office building of the most modern type. The building program included an 80 x 100 ft. hangar and experimental department, two hard-surfaced runways 1,000 ft. each and two seeded runways of approximately 2,000 ft. each. Total floor area, including the hangar, was increased from 22,000

Taylorcraft!” —Mark McGowan

was tripled, permitting the building of one plane an hour, or about 2,000 a year in one shift, or about 3,500 a year in two shifts. Total cost of the expansion program was about $225,000.” (Aircraft Year Book, 1941) As the war gained momentum in Europe, the government’s new Civilian Pilot Training Program was established, and lightplanes were in great demand—which in turn

required some creative problemsolving at times on the part of aircraft companies. Aviation historian Chet Peek, in his book The Taylorcraft Story, stated, “Taylorcraft now ranked second in lightplane production, behind Piper. . . . One of the problems facing Taylorcraft’s sales department was the delivery of planes to dealers in the more remote areas such as Texas, California and the Pacific Northwest. On July 3, [1940] Carl Elkins, Sales Manager, organized a history-making mass flight that would deliver 20 planes to the Los Angeles, California, dealer, West Coast Aircraft. Actually, this was a sensible and economical way to deliver the planes. Most of the young pilots would fly ‘free’ for the privilege of building up flying time. Navigation was simplified by dividing the group into flights of three or four planes each, so that an experienced pilot could keep the fledglings from getting lost. . . . Most of the planes in the flight were to be put to immediate use in the CPT Program which was greatly expanded in the fall of 1940. . . . Not to be outdone by the Californians, on September 17, a Texas dealer, Kadett Aviation Co. organized a flight of ten planes to College Station,

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 9

SPARKY BARNES SARGENT PHOTOS

Note the cast “TAYLOR” and “CRAFT” on the tail wheel arms. Texas. These planes were for use in the CPT Program at Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College.” Another interesting facet of the company’s history is C.G. Taylor himself, who started the company in 1936. Peek characterized him in this fashion: “[he] continued to be liked, almost worshipped, by most of the young employees. He would occasionally take one of them for a ride after work to demonstrate the performance of the Taylorcraft and explain his ideas on airplane design. Taylor was especially proud of the inherent longitudinal stability of the Model B. . . . C.G. Taylor can truly be called the father of the light airplane industry. At one time, before WWII, his two famous designs, the Taylorcraft and the Taylor Cub, comprised well over half of the world’s light aircraft fleet.”

Restoration Although Mark and Ken lived in different states, they worked on the restoration as a team. Their first order of business was protecting the fuselage from further deterioration. They had it sandblasted, inspected, and powder-coated, all on the same day. “The Detroit area is industrial, so the technology existed locally, and there was a bake oven large enough to accommodate the fuselage,” explains Ken. Mark and Ken discovered that “everything was a challenge on a prewar Taylorcraft! The cowling was a

10 MAY 2010

The prewar wheelpants feature a center-seam trim crafted out of aluminum.

wonderful project—it took at least a year.” Ken made new boot cowls and put the windshield on, then installed the A-65-8 engine (which he overhauled). With that accomplished, he began the tedious process of hand-forming the lower cowl, devoting special attention to making the louvers on the bottom portion of the cowl. An aftermarket nose bowl might have been timesaving, had it fit well—instead, it required extensive reshaping and reforming. Ken, an airframe and powerplant mechanic with inspection authorization, repaired the wings, which had been in storage long enough for mice to claim them. “We took the wings out of the hangar and took the fabric off,” recalls Ken, “and the mice had eaten the left spars out of the wing bay, way up by the tip. So we had a lot of issues with the wings—such as corrosion, half the ribs had been mangled from previous ‘repairs,’ and a lot of parts were missing.” Ken installed the fabric on the wings, while George Willford covered the fuselage. Ken used the Poly-Fiber process with an Aerothane top coat to give the airplane its glossy appearance.

Prop A wooden Sensenich propeller was standard equipment for the 1940 Taylorcraft, and this is one area in which Mark and Ken departed from originality. That’s be-

cause they found quite a prize on eBay and just couldn’t resist using a new old stock 1945 McCauley propeller. “It had never been out of the box, literally,” says Mark and with a smile. “And we kept the original box, which was shipped by rail from the factory to Connecticut. The prop had never seen the light of day; it had just been stored in a garage. We didn’t recognize the McCauley decals, which were on it, so I took a photo and sent it to McCauley down in Dayton. They verified that logo, and they verified that the diagonally painted tips were the way they painted them in 1945—usually, the stripes are at a 90-degree angle to the prop tip.”

Authentic Features One of the aspects that made the prewar Taylorcraft such a challenging project was the rarity and scarcity of available parts. “Prewars look identical to a postwar Taylorcraft, but there’s nothing interchangeable. For example, the 6-gallon aux tank was offered up through only 1940; the 1941 and later models have wing tanks. There’s a good reason why they changed to wing tanks,” explains Mark. “There’s a lever down between the pilot and passenger, near the floorboard, and it’s connected to a mechanical fuel pump. It takes 100 pumps on the wobble pump to transfer 1 gallon to the main tank—now you know why there are wing tanks! That

The black handle is for the wobble pump, and the brass handle is for the fire extinguisher. wobble pump is a real rarity—it came with the plane, so we put it back in—but you would never want to use it—it’s too much work!” Another unique feature is the flipper trim system (Flettner tabs). “The trim lever is on the pilot’s side, and is placarded for nose-up and nose-down. That plaque is supposed to be mounted upside down, because in theory, you have to look down between your legs to read it,” says Mark and laughs. “But in the Taylorcraft, there’s no space for the pilot to lean over like that!” A close look at the tail wheel reveals yet another unusual detail. The tail wheel has “TAYLOR” cast on the left arm and “CRAFT” cast on the right arm. It was a Heath tail wheel, but it was made exclusively for Taylorcraft, according to Mark. Since that tail wheel isn’t steerable, they plan to use a Scott tail wheel for normal operations. They found a decent set of prewar wheelpants advertised for sale in the Taylorcraft newsletter, and fortunately, the pants required only a little work to get them into good shape—including polishing the aluminum trim where the two halves meet. Shinn wheels came with the airplane, and they ordered new diamond-tread Aero Classic tires. They completely disassembled the brake system, cleaned it, and made any necessary repairs before reassembly and return to service—just as they did with the entire airframe.

A neatly fabricated kick plate surrounds the heel brakes.

When it came to hardware, Mark and Ken used original-style fasteners. There are no sharp-edged, plastic tie wraps anywhere on the airplane—instead, they used riblacing cord to do the job. They also used brass safety wire and silver cadmium-plated hardware. Along the way, the two discovered that white brass polishes to a sparkling shine—just one look at the pitot tube confirms this. Upon close inspection, a discerning eye may detect some rather unusual self-locking nuts. “Those are Boots aircraft nuts,” explains Mark. “They are very early prewar nuts, and are on the doors and hinges— they are original to the airplane. They have an ‘accordion’ on the ends that compresses, so when you install and tighten the Boots nut, the ‘accordion’ keeps the tension on the threads. They work well, and when they get loose, you just take them off and put them in a vise and squeeze them, or take a hammer and tap them to compress them again.” Additionally, the control cables were painstakingly hand-braided (five-tuck spliced). “Andrew King did that,” says Mark. “He’s wellnamed; he’s the king of spliced cables! The landing gear cables are soldered and wire wrapped, and he did those for us, as well.” Another helping hand was responsible for the interior and upholstery. “That was done by Tom Baker of Effingham, Illinois. He used the

original-type Bedford cord cloth for the seat, and wool for the headliner. He had all the patterns for them; he learned to fly when these airplanes were new,” says Ken, “and we had weekly phone calls with him to ask him questions.”

Award Winner Mark and Ken are happy and relieved to have the 14-year project finally finished and flying. They were faced with a momentary dilemma, however, when they contemplated flying it to Oshkosh. They had a scheduling conflict, since they had already made plans to attend the annual Howard Aircraft Foundation gathering just prior to AirVenture. But it wasn’t long before they had a solution—they asked a friend, John Maxfield, if he would be willing to fly the Taylorcraft to Oshkosh for them. John, after taking one look at the airplane, lost no time agreeing, and Mark and Ken met him on the grounds the first of the week—just in time to field questions from the aircraft judges. The judges liked what they heard and liked what they saw. NC24371 received the Bronze Age (1937-1941) Champion – Bronze Lindy award. That’s likely the first of many awards to be bestowed upon this beautifully restored prewar flying machine, which Mark plans to keep and fly for quite some time. And yes, he’ll still let Ken fly it from time to time, as well!

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 11

BOEING

n December 17, 1935, Donald Wills Douglas witnessed the first flight of his DC-3. By 1939, 90 percent of the airlines in the United States were flying DC-3s. It was the first airplane that could earn a profit from flying passengers and not rely on a U.S. Air Mail subsidy. Four years prior to that great day in 1935, events that would change how airliners were built and flown put the airline industry on the path that led to the development of the DC-3. On March 31, 1931, a TWA Fokker F10A tri-motor crashed into a Kansas wheat field, killing the two crew members and six passengers, including Knute Rockne, the legendary Notre Dame football coach. Shortly after the crash, all 33 of the Fokker F-10As were grounded pending the results of the investigation of a wing that had separated from the aircraft. This caused a near standstill in the operations of Trans World Airlines (TWA), Pan American World Airways, and others relying on that aircraft.

12 MAY 2010

The Department of Air Commerce initially said ice had broken a propeller blade on the starboard engine, causing the engine to overspeed, which in turn transmitted enough vibration to the wing to fracture it. But investigations showed the airframe had 1,887 hours on it, and the wing root had rotted away, causing the wing to break off when the pilot tried to climb above turbulence. Fokker’s name was so well respected that no provision had been made for inspection panels for critical parts of the airframe. The crash ruined Fokker’s reputation and his business. The air transport business was still in its infancy, and numerous crashes had caused the public to lose confidence in commercial aviation. The tragedy would eventually force the existing airlines to seek safer airplanes. While Fokker’s F-10A aircraft later went back into service, the major airlines had abandoned them. That set in motion events that would change the world.

A Need for Safer Airplanes In Seattle, Washington, William Boeing had struggled through the

The Boeing 247 was the answer to the noisy, uncomfortable Fords and Fokkers. The all-metal, twin-engine monoplane reflected creature comfor ts unheard of in the other airplanes. The carpeted floors, reclining seats, steam heat, and a cabin insulated from weather and noise had led William Boeing to say, “This plane is the airliner that will put us in the Pullman business.” However, within a year the DC-2 made it obsolete. economic depression of the postWorld War I aviation development by building military aircraft. Boeing had developed an all-metal, opencockpit bomber design. However, his design lost out in a government competition to a Glenn L. Martin Company aircraft. Boeing was stuck with an airplane design and no buyer, but some saw its potential as a civilian air transport. The XB-9 bomber was modified extensively, and what rolled out was the civilian Boeing 247. The 247 was a streamlined, stressed-skin, all-metal, twin-engine, low-wing monoplane that reflected creature comforts unheard of in other air-

THE

Douglas DC-3 75 years of service: Part 1 BY

HENRY M. HOLDEN

The “Birth Certificate of the DC Ships”

BOEING

The five seats on each side of the Boeing 247 cabin allowed passengers to move in the aisle, with one minor inconvenience. Because of the low-wing, cantilever design, the main wing spar ran through the cabin, interrupting the aisle. Cabin insulation reduced the noise below the 110-decibel level of the Ford Tri-Motors. Compare the narrow appearance of the 247 to the DC-1 photo shown in this article. Even with its shortcomings, the Boeing 247 revolutionized coast-to-coast travel. planes. It had carpeted floors, reclining seats, steam heat, and a cabin insulated from weather and noise. The 10-passenger airliner cost $68,000, and Boeing estimated that the total operating costs were 2.5 cents per mile. United Airlines advertised the plane as the “ThreeMile-A-Minute Airliner.” TWA went to Boeing to place an order for the 247 to replace its aging Ford Tri-Motors and Fokker F-10s.

Boeing was agreeable to an order, but only after it filled an order for 60 for United Airlines. This was Boeing’s biggest attempt at manufacturing to date. The order tied up Boeing’s factory, thus ensuring that United’s competitors would not share the prestige of flying the first modern all-metal airliner for at least two years. Boeing’s refusal to increase its manufacturing capacity forced TWA to look to the Douglas Aircraft Company.

On August 2, 1932, 38-year-old Donald Douglas opened a letter from Jack Frye, TWA vice president of operations. TWA wanted to purchase 10 or more all-metal, trimotor monoplanes. Douglas later called the letter “The Birth Certificate of the DC Ships.” The specs called for a gross weight of 14,000 pounds, a range of 1,000 miles, the capacity to carry 12 passengers and two pilots, and takeoff fully loaded on two of the three engines. After the Douglas engineering team developed a proposal, Arthur Raymond, Douglas’ assistant chief engineer, and Harold Wetzel, general manager, boarded a train for New York to present the proposal to TWA. “We traveled by train for two reasons,” said Raymond to me in 1988. “We had much ground to cover and hundreds of details to lay out, and I needed secluded time to work out my performance figures. Also, we really wanted to get there.” During that period, the airlines had seen a sharp increase in accidents and neither man wanted to become a statistic. The state of commercial air travel in 1932 was expensive, unreliable, and dangerous. Raymond flew part of the way home on a TWA Ford Tri-Motor. He knew what TWA was looking for— something like the Ford Tri-Motor,

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 13

COURTESY HENRY M. HOLDEN

HENRY M. HOLDEN

A Ford Tri-Motor, similar to the one Arthur Raymond flew in, is shown here in the skies of Oshkosh, Wisconsin, in 2005. The Ford Tri-Motor, nicknamed The Tin Goose, was first produced in 1925 by Henr y Ford and continued in production until June 7, 1933. A total of 199 aircraft were produced.

COURTESY HENRY M. HOLDEN

The Ford was designed for comfor t, with soft wicker chairs and padded headrests. Seat belts had not yet come into fashion. The air vent horns stick out from each window frame, little comfort if the passenger became airsick, which was often the case since the Fords often flew around 7,500 feet in the turbulent lower altitudes. Note the uniformed radio operator and the early communications radio to his left.

This 14-passenger TWA DC-2 is 1 month old in this June 1934 photograph. Every passenger flew first class. On TWA and American Airlines’ ser vice to Los Angeles, they typically offered three breakfast and dinner menus served on genuine Syracuse china with Reed and Barton silver ware. A flight attendant could ser ve 14 passengers in under an hour. only better. When Raymond boarded the aircraft, he received the usual “comfort pack,” which included cotton for his ears, smelling salts for if he felt faint, and an airsick cup. The trip radically changed Raymond’s idea of what to design. What came off the Douglas drawing board was a twin-engine, lowwing, all-metal monoplane. The engineers decided not to use electrical gear retraction (as in the Boeing 247) since they felt the apparatus was subject to failure. Instead, the gear would operate hydraulically, retracting into the newly developed NACA streamlined nacelles and deploying by gravity in case of a hy-

14 MAY 2010

BOEING

This is a rare photo of the DC-1 with the rear wheel fairing designed to improve its aerodynamics. This modification was soon removed because the improvement was negligible. Some Douglas engineer kept tr ying to get it adopted because it was tried again on the DC-2 and the DC-3.

draulic failure. For safety, the engineers decided the wheels would not fully retract. In the up position, the main gear wheels protruded from the nacelles about half their diameter. In a wheels-up emergency landing, the low wing would help shield the passengers, and the half-extended wheels would cushion the landing, or so the design logic went. This was a radical departure from the multiengine aircraft in commercial service. Except for the Boeing 247, most U.S. aircraft, including the Fokker, Ford, and Boeing trimotors, were high-wing airplanes with fixed landing gear.

The Douglas Commercial 1 On July 1, 1933, at 12:36 p.m., 332 days after Douglas received Fr ye’s letter, the main gear of a DC-1 left the ground. The takeoff was perfect, but the new Douglas airliner was just barely a hundred feet off the ground when the left engine sputtered and quit. A moment later, the right engine did the same. Carl Cover, the pilot, knew they had a problem, but he did not know how serious it was. Needing altitude to maneuver, and with only seconds to react, Cover pushed the yoke forward to gain airspeed. Both engines suddenly cut back in. He coaxed the plane up to 1,000

BOEING

This DC-2 NC14285, c/n 1328, was delivered to the Standard Oil Corporation of California (now Chevron) in November 1934. It crashed in the Great Salt Lake, Utah, on October 6, 1935. The crew did not perish in the crash, but did in an attempt to swim to shore.

The DC-1 is shown undergoing static tests. A distinctive feature of the DC-1 wing and one that had its roots in Northrop technology was the straightchord center section with straight trailing edges on the outer panels, but swept back 15 degrees on the leading edges.

BOEING

feet and started to pull the nose up. Again, the engines sputtered and quit. He put the nose down, and the engines came back to life. He knew he had to land immediately and safely. He couldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t risk the airplane or the life of his copilot. Carl Cover earned his salary on that 12-minute ride. He landed the plane and taxied into the hangar. They quickly discovered the cause of the almost fatal flight; the carburetors had been installed in reverse on each engine, so that when the nose came up, the fuel flow in each carb ceased, causing the engine to quit running.

Douglas Commercial 2 The DC-1 went on to meet TWAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s requirements, and it ordered 20 more airliners with suggested changes. The DC-2 was born, and commercial airlines would never be the same. Producing an improved DC-1 was not just a matter of mass-producing the DC-1 with some assembly line changes. It meant new drawings, a mock-up, and new tooling. Wright Aeronautical Corporation had just introduced its 855-hp engine, and with the increased horsepower, Douglas could stretch the DC-1 airframe. Douglas added 2 feet to the fuselage, which allowed for another row of seats. Stretching the cabin changed the center of gravity so the wing had to be moved, effectively creating a new transport. The Douglas engineers reviewed the changes and decided to call the new aircraft the Douglas Commercial 2, or DC-2.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 15

BOEING

HENRY M. HOLDEN

The DC-1 belly-landed into the runway because no one lowered the landing gear. What is not widely known is that Douglas’ engineers felt that the landing gear did not need mechanical down locks. Two embarrassing gear collapses during taxiing at public demonstrations convinced them to install the devices.

DC-2 NC13711, c/n 1368, at the Museum of Flight in 2008. It was previously registered as NC1934D. This rare early airliner is expected to take part in the 75th anniversar y celebration of the DC-3 at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2010.

NEW JERSEY AVIATION HALL OF FAME

American Airlines NC14988, Flagship Texas, was the first DC-3 and was configured as the first Douglas Sleeper Transpor t (DST). You can see the small windows installed above each sleeper bunk. It was assigned c/n 1494 and was powered by two Wright Cyclone SGR-1820-G-5 engines. On May 25, 1942, the airplane was sold to the Defense Supplies Corp., then to the War Department on July 21, 1942. It was given U.S. Army Air Forces serial number 42-43619 and crashed at Knob Noster, Missouri, October 15, 1942. In deciding to manufacture the DC-2, Douglas took another calculated risk. The DC-1 had cost the company more than $350,000. TWA agreed to pay $65,000 for each DC-2 (sans engines), and Douglas was betting the DC-2 would catch on so he could recoup his research and development costs. When the 76th DC-2 rolled off the line, it put Douglas in the black, clearing the research, development, and losses on the DC-1 and the first 25 DC2s. The DC-1 had taken 58,000 man-hours to build, and the experts said they had to cut the time to 38,000 hours if they wanted to show a profit. The first 25 DC-2s came off the line before the arrival of Henry Guerin’s hydro-presses. Guerin’s presses eliminated much of the manual shaping of the metal and cut production time down to 32,000 hours.

16 MAY 2010

FAA

The last DC-3 operated by the FAA, N34, is a “retired” flight-inspection aircraft that is used as an aviationawareness static display at air shows around the countr y. The N34 was used to check the national air navigation aides.

Douglas Sleeper Transport Douglas’ first real commercial success began when American Airlines entered the picture. Thanks to the acquisition of different airlines as American expanded and grew, it had a mixed fleet of Curtiss Condor biplane sleepers and Ford and Fokker tri-motors. It needed to modernize its fleet. American was losing millions of dollars, and it wanted a modern airplane, with sleeper berths, since that attracted luxury passengers. It ordered several DC-2s. The DC-2 was a vast improvement over its previous airplanes, but it was too narrow to fit a comfortable sleeping berth. American Airlines decided it needed a bigger airplane. Cyrus Rowlett (C.R.) Smith, president of American Airlines, and William Littlewood, vice president of engineering, had both flown in the DC-2 and did not like some

of its performance characteristics. It had the highest-rated engines in use at the time, but they felt it lacked power. It could not make New York to Chicago nonstop, although it was faster than any other airliner on that route. They also had pilot reports that it was difficult to land. It did carry 14 passengers, two more than the DC-1 and the Boeing 247. Littlewood sat down with his engineers and began to redesign the DC-2. His sketches of the proposed sleeper closely resembled the later Douglas Sleeper Transport (DST). Smith, looking for something larger than the DC-2, telephoned Donald Douglas with a proposal. He finally convinced Douglas to modify a DC-2 to American’s sleeper requirements. Douglas had been reluctant to take on a new design. The DC-2 was in full production, with 102

In the late 1930s, airport security was a nonissue. In this gate area at Newark Airport, the only thing keeping the passengers away from the propellers on this DC-3 is a small iron fence. One passenger compared the DC-3 to the other airplanes of the day: “It was like flying from your living room. The windows even had curtains.” NEW JERSEY AVIATION HALL OF FAME

Eastern Airlines’ DC-3s line up on the ramp in front of the administration/terminal building. “The Great Silver Fleet” consisted of Eastern Airlines DC-3s all burnished to the silver-like finish of the base metal. The individual planes were called “SILVERLINERS.” The aircraft in the foreground survives today and is on display inside the New England Air Museum, at the Bradley International Airport, in Windsor, Connecticut.

NEW JERSEY AVIATION HALL OF FAME

COURTESY HENRY M. HOLDEN

Eastern Airlines “351” DST-318 NC25650, c/n 2225, was commandeered by the USAAF June 8, 1942. It returned to Eastern July 1944, as NC25650. It was sold on April 15, 1952, and registered N1300M and went through almost a dozen owners. Its registration was canceled in August 1988. airframes already manufactured, and another 90 orders ready for the assembly line. A new model meant new tooling—an expensive gamble. Littlewood’s drawings suggested the new design would be wider and have the DC-2 center section and outer wing panels, but have a larger cockpit and bigger tail surfaces than the DC-2. When Douglas engineers reviewed Littlewood’s drawings, they estimated they would reuse about 80 percent of the original DC-2 design. Littlewood and his assistant, Otto Kirchner, and Raymond worked nearly six months on the design.

The DC-3 On July 8, 1935, Smith sent Douglas a telegram, ordering 10 of the new transports. The actual specifications for Smith’s proposed airplane arrived at Douglas Aircraft on November 14, 1935. Before the

On Januar y 7, 1938, American Airlines’ Flagship Kentucky dropped out of a pea soup fog and pouring rain to find itself without enough runway to stop before it hit a fence. The pilot executed a missed approach, overshot the runway, and landed in the marshlands about a mile from the runway. The five passengers, three crew, and 750 pounds of mail sur vived. The DC-3 was repaired and flew for various companies until 1972.

first flight of the DC-3, American Airlines had also doubled its initial order to eight Douglas Sleeper Transports and 12 DC-3s. The actual contract was signed on April 8, 1936. In today’s business environment the contract always precedes work, but in 1935, American Airlines and Douglas had such faith in each other’s dependability, and integrity, that the construction came first and the contract after delivery. “We gave Bill (Littlewood) almost a free hand in establishing the dimensions in the cabin and deciding what went into the cockpit layout,” said Raymond. “The DC-3 was a product of teamwork. This was the primary reason it was so successful.” American Airlines flew a Curtiss Condor to Santa Monica so the Douglas engineers could study the berths and improve on them. Lit-

tlewood and Harry Wetzel lay down in the mock-up berths to judge the size and to find the best position for the reading light, call button, and airsick cup. When Wetzel felt closed in, they decided to install a small window (unique to the 38 DSTs manufactured) in the upper berths to prevent claustrophobia. What rolled off the assembly line on December 14, 1935, was much more than Littlewood had put on paper. It was a new aircraft, both in design and size. It had a wider and longer fuselage, greater span, larger empennage area, stronger landing gear, and more power than the DC2. The final product was only about 10 percent interchangeable with DC-2 parts. Aviation design had taken giant steps in a few short years. Douglas engineers discovered certain color continued on page 39

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 17

Light Plane Heritage published in EAA Experimenter January 1990

The Model L L.W.F./Cato Butterfly with Captain “Jack” Foote (left) and Joseph L. Cato.

JOSEPH L. CATO NEARLY A LEGEND by Owen S. Billman Photos from the Paul Matt Collection courtesy Drina Welch Abel, Aviation Heritage Research Center John Greenleaf Whittier might have had Joseph L. Cato in mind when he wrote,“. . . of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, ‘It might have been!’” Throughout his lifespan, Cato was dedicated to providing a small airplane and a dependable engine that would be affordable, safe, and fun to fly for his fellow man who shared his longing to fly. His designs were excellent, advanced for their time; his engines were triumphs of simplicity and efficiency. No less an authority than the renowned engine designer Harold E. Morehouse once stated: “His (Cato’s) engine was easily the forerunner of the lightplane engine which was to follow in later

years, after a market (for it) developed.” It is difficult to understand how a talent such as Cato’s had escaped recognition and renown except that he really appeared to have been one of those “hard-luck kids.” Several times it appeared that he had a sure thing going when fate would deal him another blow. Born in 1889 in North Yakima, Washington, of obviously understanding parents, Cato discovered the new world of aeronautics early on. He was fascinated by the subject and thoroughly researched it as he grew through boyhood. Age 14 found him designing, building, and flying a 28-foot-span glider. It provided two satisfying

Editor’s Note: The Light Plane Heritage series in EAA’s Experimenter magazine often touched on aircraft and concepts related to vintage aircraft and their history. Since many of our members have not had the opportunity to read this series, we plan on publishing those LPH articles that would be of interest to VAA members. Enjoy!—HGF

18 MAY 2010

The Butterfly in its original parasol configuration, summer 1919. flights before a resounding crash ended the project. Later, when his family moved to San Francisco, he enrolled for a night-school course in engineering. In 1908, at age 19, he submitted plans and specifications to the U.S. War Department, presumed to be receiving bids for a flying machine. He received little more than an acknowledgement, but he continued his studies and construction, producing three Curtiss-type biplanes and a Bleriot-style monoplane between 1909 and 1915. His activities during this period were accomplished after hours out of necessity, as he was employed days as a machinist and gas engine repairman, good experience for events to follow. In 1914, Cato left California to join Captain Thomas S. Baldwin’s team of exhibition aviators. The next year, he returned to his first love, designing aircraft and engines, this time with the Sloane Aircraft Company, Bound Brook, New Jersey. He was dissatisfied with his assignments there, so after having started with Sloane in November 1915, he left in April 1916 to join the L.W.F. Engineering Company at College Point, Long Island. L.W.F. was a well-respected company by then, and Cato soon found himself with the title of experimental engineer and assistant to the general manager. Throughout his career, he was obsessed with the desire to produce an aircraft that would be affordable and simple enough to be maintained by the average man. To achieve these requirements, he was convinced such a plane would, out of necessity, be small, but adequately powered by a simple, light engine that had the further quality of dependability in adequate amounts, one that could be counted on to keep running indefinitely or as long as the pilot required it to operate. Such engines for light planes were extremely rare in those days. With these goals in mind, he worked in his spare time on both his ideas of a small plane and a suitable engine, alternating his attention as time would allow. The engine design that he developed was an air-cooled, two-cylinder, horizontally opposed, four-stroke type designed to develop 70 hp at best rpm. Later, when it was finished, it developed 72 hp at 1,825 rpm and weighed just 134 pounds complete. While Cato was in this position and with his assistance, L.W.F. planes went on to great renown. Their work

with their Model V (a large biplane) introduced several innovations for the time, one being the first fully monocoque, molded plywood fuselage, and balanced control surfaces. Powered at first with the 135-hp V8 Thomas engine, it was upgraded with the substitution of the Liberty 6 and was flight-tested in January 1918. These planes exhibited excellent performance and went on to make many noteworthy flights. In the summer of that year, Cato learned that the Marlin-Rockwell Company of New Haven, Connecticut, was contemplating the marketing of a small sportplane and engine for postwar use, something that appeared to be right down his alley. His work with L.W.F. had been engrossing and he had been of great value to that company, but his first love and dream had seemed no nearer to fruition, so it is not surprising that he left and soon found himself hired and hard at work at Marlin-Rockwell. While there, he was able to fly the requirements for his pilot license. His design work progressed rapidly, since he was able to spend full time on it, but quite soon it became evident that the Marlin-Rockwell Company officials had changed their minds about putting his little plane and engine into production. The following spring, he left to return to the L.W.F. Corporation on the promise that he could develop just such a lightplane while at the same time assisting on the redesign of L.W.F.’s mailplane candidate dubbed the Owl. On leaving Marlin-Rockwell, he had retained the rights to manufacture his small two-cylinder engine and was able to design his new small lightplane around it (now whimsically dubbed the “Butterfly,” as contrasted to the much larger “Owl”). This new plane appeared initially as a parasol monoplane. It was light and flew very well in this configuration; however, he was not satisfied with it, and it was soon modified so that the wings were mounted at the top longeron in shoulder-wing style. This change resulted in better performance because of reduced parasite drag, since many struts and wires were eliminated. Cato’s concept of the ideal airplane for the common man had no provision for high speed; he favored ease of control, slow landing and takeoff speed, economy of operation and maintenance, and above all, safety. So, his Butterfly could do 72 mph maximum, carry 383

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 19

pounds of payload, and still get off at 30 mph. The prototype, designated the Model L by L.W.F, was extensively tested at Hazelhurst Field, near Mineola, Long Island, by the (then) wellknown Army pilot Captain John Foote in the autumn of 1919 and again (the shoulder-wing version) in early spring 1920. Captain Foote was pleased with the new version, declaring it a true pleasure to handle, both Captain Foote and the L.W.F. Cato Model L Butterfly. on the ground and in the air. Landing at 30 mph, he was able to consistently demonstrate that he could touch down into a light breeze, estimated at 6 mph, and come to a complete stop in 60 feet. His takeoffs were eyeopeners, too, as he could get off regularly in 50 to 60 feet from a standing start. In those days, the biplane was king and there were many scoffers. But these scoffers were shown and fed the required information; Foote was able to change frank disbelief to grudging acceptance that Sitting on the Butterfly’s back helped hold it down during high engine such outstanding performance could rpm run-up. be had from a monoplane design. Several sales commitments were essential to ensure The evidence was there and simply couldn’t be denied. profitability, as extensive investments would be necIt became obvious that Cato had a good thing going. The Butterfly was put through a very extensive pro- essary for jigs in building the aircraft as well as heavy gram of flight tests for the next three months. Captain investments in tooling and casting required for manufacFoote was so impressed that he urged company officials turing the new Cato engine. The outlook was grim, but it reached disastrous proto permit him to take the little plane on an extended tour of the country, making flight demonstrations as he went, portions on March 31, 1920, when Captain Foote was stressing its ability to provide safe, low-cost, fun flying for killed in the Butterfly while demonstrating at Hazelhurst the weekend pilot. If certain unfortunate circumstances Field. A large crowd, including several executives of the had not intervened, it is quite likely that this little plane Curtiss Company, were watching while Foote made a low and its dependable Cato engine would have marked an pass. As he pulled up sharply and started a left turn, the early breakthrough in the marketing of the lightplane for right wing broke loose at the outboard life strut fittings and rotated upward, wrenching that wing free of the civil aviation. The L.W.F. Company was so pleased with the perfor- aircraft. As the wreckage struck the ground, the popular mance of the Butterfly that it started a campaign of ad- “Captain Jack” was killed instantly. vertising, quoting a price of $2,500 complete, F.O.B. ColLater it was proven that this crash, which dashed the lege Point, New York. The shoulder-wing model looked hopes of marketing the Butterfly, was caused by an outravery racy to the crowds of young men who showed up geous act on the part of one of L.W.F.’s employees who to watch it perform. During the summer of 1920, the maintained the aircraft: In the course of one of the modicompany stepped up its marketing efforts, but a running fications required, this man had inadvertently drilled a survey confirmed its fears: The customers interested in hole nearly through a wing spar, and then to hide his purchasing a new plane simply would not spend that blunder, he had filled the hole with a nonstructural makind of money when it was possible to purchase brand- terial. Because of this act, a fine pilot was killed and an new Jennies and Standards just out of the crate as war excellent new design had to be shelved. But it also had besurplus for as little as $500, often even less than that. In come apparent that the world was not yet ready to accept addition, replacement engines, landing gear, and wing the light sportplane, at least not at the prices required to panels were available at giveaway prices. Thus the Butter- market it at a reasonable profit. Cato’s Butterfly and his fly’s price tag of $2,500 placed its purchase on a plateau hopes for a lightplane were quashed, at least temporarily. that was beyond the reach of most prospects. Although Cato was visibly shocked and disheartened

20 MAY 2010

over the tragedy, his enthusiasm for the concept of a cheap, practical lightplane wouldn’t be quelled. He soon left L.W.F. and joined with G. Elias & Brother Inc. of Buffalo, New York, where he was able to continue his campaign by designing a new lightplane titled the Elias “Aircoupe.” This plane seated two persons sideby-side and featured a closed canopy that might be removed for summer flying, if desired. The seating arrangement was well liked and several were sold, but once more, it appeared that fate intervened in the form of the Stock Market Crash of 1929. And that candidate, too, was withdrawn from the market. Cato, pioneer plane builder, pilot, and aeronautical engineer, was a visionary who, from the first, had enthusiasm for the mere possibility of flying. He, like so many of his contemporaries, was initially led to build something that looked like an airplane and then do his utmost to coax it into the air. Unfortunately for him and for us who love to fly, the timing of his efforts seemed invariably wrong. What might have been the result of his efforts if . . . if . . . if! Cato left the Elias company in 1930 to become general superintendent and production manager at the Emsco Aircraft Corporation, Downey, California, where he supervised the redesign of three of its planes and steered them through the required Approved Type Certificate test. During this period, he designed another lightplane and engine on his own time. The Emsco Aircraft Corporation ceased operation, another victim of the Depression, so Cato started his own company, hoping to get into manufacturing on his own. But this did not materialize. In 1941 he became chief aircraft maintenance inspector and general superintendent of shops at Castle Air Force Base, Merced, California. He remained there until his retirement in May of 1953. He died at Turlock, California, on February 28, 1965, at age 77. He was survived by a wife and son.

Cato 72-hp Aero Engine In the original design laid down for this engine, all experimental and untried features were eliminated, and only features which had been proven by the designer’s long experience were used. Light weight was obtained by simplifying design rather than building light parts. The engine was a two-cylinder, horizontally opposed, four-stroke, air-cooled, valvein-head type Bore, 5 inches; stroke, 6 inches; piston displacement, 263.63 cubic inches; compression ratio -4.33 to 1; and weight complete ready to run 134 pounds, corresponding to a specific weight of about 1.86 pounds per horsepower. The rated horsepower was 72 at 1,825 rpm. The crankcase was a two-piece aluminum alloy casting split vertically. The engine was bolted to the fuselage with eight 3/8-inch bolts set at a large pitch diameter at the rear of the crankcase; the rear of the crankcase formed the gear-case housing. The actuating mechanism consisted of one camshaft with two cams: one inlet cam and one exhaust cam, operating four tappets, each connected to its valve push-rod. The cylinders were machined from solid-steel forgings; 15 cooling fins were machined on the outside of the barrel. Two sparkplug bosses were provided, one on each side of the cylinder head between the valves. The crankshaft was also machined from a solid-steel forging and was of the doublethrow type. The flange for the propeller was machined integrally with the crankshaft. The oiling system was of the dry-sump noncirculating type. Oil pressure was provided by a dual plunger-pump drawing oil from a tank in the fuselage, delivering a small quantity to each of the cylinders every 7-1/2 revolutions of the crankshaft. On the down stroke of the plungers, a small quantity of oil was delivered into the gear case, lubricating the oil pump reduction gears and the valve-operating mechanism. The main bearings, crankpin, and piston-pin bearings were lubricated from oil spray in the crankcase. Ignition was by Bosch magneto, carburetion by Zenith carburetor. Overall dimensions were: width 46-1/8 inches, length 23-1/10 inches, height 20-1/4 inches. Oil consumption was 2 pounds per hour. This engine, driving an 86-inch propeller, provided a lot of torque at its takeoff rating of 1,825 rpm and cruising rating of 1,650 rpm. The old truism, assuming engines of equal displacement, holds: The old system of turning a large-diameter propeller at a relatively low rpm provides more torque than the current practice of turning a smaller propeller at high speed. The Cato engine was ideally suited to powering aircraft of its day.

Acknowledgments I wish to express my thanks to the following for their generous input to this ar ticle: George A. Hardie Jr., A. J. “Jack” McRae, and Dennis Parks. Other sources: Aerial Age Weekly, October 6, 1919; Flight Magazine, October 9, 1919; Aviation magazine, March 1, 1920; Who’s Who in American Aeronautics; AAHS Journal, No. 4, 1967; Paul Matt Historical Aviation Album, No. 11; and Long Island Early Fliers Club Newsletter, April 1986.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 21

My Friend

Albert Vollmecke Part 5 BY

ROBERT G. LOCK

hen we ended last month’s installment, we were at the Sun ’n Fun Fly-In in 1989 (that seems like yesterday to me) in the company of Albert Vollmecke. About the same time that I discovered Vollmecke, my Florida friend Joe Araldi discovered him, too. Araldi wanted to build a replica Little Rocket racer and was able to acquire a copy of the original prints from Vollmecke. He had given them to his son, Albert Jr., for safekeeping. Vollmecke’s design was far advanced for its time. The Little Rocket featured shock absorbers located inside the wheels. And it had a unique aileron control system; a small crank on top of the control stick allowed the pilot to crank both ailerons down 15 degrees for landing, which increased the camber of the wing, thus giving it more lift. The increased lift was needed for takeoffs and landings in the high country of the west, as the ship had only 88 square feet of wing area. The Command-Aire Little Rocket was piloted by Lee Gehlbach in the All American Cirrus Derby and won the race with an average speed of 127.11 mph. This average speed was achieved using a 110-hp supercharged Cirrus inline, four-cylinder engine. Gehlbach and the Little Rocket had bested some of the best racing pilots and airplanes of the day. Three in particular stand out—Lowell Bayles flying the Gee Bee Sportster Model X, Jimmy Wedell flying the Wedell-Williams Racer, and Harvey Mummert flying the Mercury Racer. After winning the race the Little Rocket racer was immediately sold and went on to race in the 1930 National Air Races held in Chicago from August 23 to September 1. The ship was flown by E.Z. Newsom and

22 MAY 2010

My file copies of Albert’s Little Rocket prints given to me by Al’s son, Albert Jr. The drawings are highly detailed, providing data to make every part of the aircraft. I asked Al if he ever made the drawings with some details left out to be finalized upon manufacture, and then drawn. He said it didn’t work that way and that his drawings were rarely revised. The factory built only one Little Rocket.

The original Little Rocket racer under construction at the Command-Aire factory in Little Rock. A 5C3 left upper wing covered and painted through silver is used as a backdrop to highlight the wooden structure of the ship. attained a speed of 151.85 mph in the Men’s Free-forall for engines up to 350 cubic inches. Newsom finished second behind Ben Howard in his Gypsy Howard at 161.01 mph. The final chapter of the Command-Aire Little Rocket came in 1932 when the owner drove to Memphis to retrieve the airplane, which had been damaged in a landing accident. In a letter from the Hartford Fire Insurance

Barbara Baron Martinsville, Virginia Q

13,000+ hours: single- and multi-engine, flight instructor, commercial hot air balloon

FAA Pilot Examiner for nearly 40 years: began at Pittsburgh FSDO, currently Richmond FSDO

Flew two All-Women Transcontinental Air Races

Mom to six and Granny to 18

Barbara Baron is the owner of this antique French/ Belgian “Stampe.” Barbara, and her husband Bob, operated the fixed base at Martinsville Blue Ridge Airport for 15 years. She later became the Chief Flight Instructor at Averett University, Danville, Virginia. “AUA is the best! They are, and will remain my aviation insurance company.” — Barbara Baron AUA is Vintage Aircraft Association approved. To become a member of VAA call 800-843-3612.

Aviation insurance with the EAA Vintage Program offers: Lower premiums with payment options Q Additional coverages On-line quote request available Q AUA is licensed in all states

Flexibility on the use of your aircraft

The best is affordable. Give AUA a call – it’s FREE!

Experienced agents

Remember, We’re Better Together!

800-727-3823 Fly with the pros… fly with AUA Inc. www.auaonline.com

The license for the completed ship was issued July 7, 1930, and number NR-10403 was assigned, with an expiration date of September 18, 1930. The ship was restricted for racing purposes only.

Below: The completed Little Rocket racer outside the Command-Aire factory building.

The men involved in the creation and racing of the first Little Rocket. Left to right are Lee Gehlbach (pilot), Albert Vollmecke (designer), Robert Snowden (president of Command-Aire Incorporated), and Charles E. Shoemaker Jr. (president of the Little Rock Racing Association). The aircraft was designed to compete in the All American Cirrus Derby, a 5,500-mile course beginning July 21, 1930, starting at Detroit, Michigan, and ending back at Detroit. The Little Rocket won and received a cash prize of $15,000, a huge sum in 1930.

Lee Gehlbach won the All American Cirrus Derby with an average speed of 127.11 mph. Company, Chicago, Illinois, dated March 15, 1932, to Mr. Clarence Young, Assistant Secretary, Department of Commerce, Aeronautics Division, Washington, D.C., the disposition of the Little Rocket is made very clear: On or about May 28th or 29th the plane started from Little Rock to the Birmingham races and stopped at Memphis where the plane was laid up for repairs and was never flown thereafter. It would appear that the trouble at this time at Memphis was caused by a cam bearing being worn out, the bearings in the supercharger ruined, and that the oil, as well as the crank cover, all of which allowed the oil to run back in the supercharger. The plane was dismantled by the engine being removed and was never repaired. On or about June 17th or 18th, the owner with others appeared at Memphis and had the engine temporarily boarded in the plane and the plane placed in the trailer, and while the plane was being towed in this trailer by a Ford Coupe between Little Rock and Russellville, it caught fire and was burned, for which a claim was first presented against

24 MAY 2010

this company in the sum of $10,000, and later suit [was] brought to recover $7,500. The claim was investigated by the writer and the company denied liability and prepared to defend the suit in the Federal Court in Little Rock, the case coming up in the April term of court there. Thus ends the story of the Little Rocket designed by Vollmecke and built by Command-Aire Incorporated, Little Rock, Arkansas. That is until Mr. Joe Araldi came along. Araldi formerly owned a Command-Aire 5C3, NX925E, until it was sold to the Arkansas Aviation Museum in Little Rock. He was anxious to get started on another Command-Aire and decided to re-create the Little Rocket racer. Vollmecke furnished Araldi with a complete set of Little Rocket drawings that he had compiled in 1930; they were the only drawings that survived the closing of the Little Rock factory. Araldi started the painstaking job of building a replica of the Little Rocket racer from scratch, including the

The construction of the second Little Rocket fuselage takes shape in Joe Araldi’s hangar. Compare this fuselage to the original shown earlier in this column. Note the small fuel tank contoured to fit the shape of the fuselage and the wood engine-mount structure. The fuel and oil capacities were 31-1/4 gallons and 2-1/2 gallons, respectively. With Bob Lock looking on, Joe Araldi puts some ground time on the newly overhauled Wright Gypsy engine. So impressed with the project, Vollmecke decreed that Araldi’s Little Rocket was serial number 2, and it was so designated.

Little Rocket serial number 2 in flight. shock-absorbing wheels invented by Vollmecke. Araldi could not locate an airworthy Cirrus engine, so he decided to build the airframe around a similar engine, the Wright Gypsy four-cylinder, upright, inline, air-cooled engine. Construction took place in Lakeland, Florida,

26 MAY 2010

primarily in Araldi’s hangar at the Green Swamp Aerodrome. The project of replicating the ship took eight years from start in 1982 to test flight in 1990. The aircraft was fully assembled and rigged at Araldi’s hangar, then disassembled and moved into the

Joe Araldi fabricating an aileron with the Little Rocket replica being assembled in background. Note the leading edge faired in with balsa wood. The aircraft is constructed mostly of Sitka spruce and mahogany or birch plywood, making the ship very strong and light in weight. Araldi decided not to try and duplicate Vollmecke’s drooping ailerons for low-speed control. maintenance hangar at the Sun ’n Fun site on the Lakeland airport. Araldi and Bob Lock completed a weight and balance of the Little Rocket and adjusted the center of gravity slightly by adding two bags of lead shot inside the forward fuselage. Both Command-Aire ships, my model 5C3, NC997E, and Araldi’s Little Rocket serial number MR-2, were proudly displayed in the museum at the 1989 Sun ’n Fun Fly-In at Lakeland, Florida. Araldi completed and flew the Little Rocket on April 13, 1990. On April 17 he flew the ship with the Vollmecke family present. Araldi made a total of four flights on the ship before it went on display in the Sun ’n Fun museum at the Lakeland airport, where it can be viewed today. Albert A. Vollmecke (1901–1994) will be remembered for his achievements and expertise as an engineer and designer of aircraft, having served the public well in the Civil Aeronautics Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration for a good part of his life. He is indeed an inspiration to those fortunate enough to have known him.

Vintage Mechanic

THE

BY ROBERT G. LOCK

Continental W-670 main bearing failures Part II Since the first installment in a previous issue on the subject of rear main bearing failures in Continental W-670 aircraft engines, I am reminded of another such incident in a Boeing Stearman here in central Florida. The bearing began to fail at approximately 380 hours after engine major overhaul, at about the same operating time my bearing failed. The logbook showed the engine had been overhauled by a very reputable facility in 1994, and both front and rear bearings had been replaced with new parts. So here we go again with the same old problem, which, if not caught early, can have catastrophic results for both pilot and airplane. This particular airplane had a Sensenich wood prop installed; therefore, it would be my conclusion that bearing failures can occur on engines with either wood or metal props, just as Al Holloway had stated to me several months ago. Unlike other small seven-cylinder radial engines such as Wright, Lycoming, and Warner, the Continental W-670 was manufactured in huge numbers for aircraft, boats, and tanks. Many airplanes continue to fly using this powerplant. It is obvious that the rear main ball bearing is the weak link in this particular type of engine. When Continental modified the W-670-6A or -6N to the -23 in order to accommodate a constant-speed propeller, engineers boosted the horsepower to 240 and installed a roller bearing in the rear main position. Again it

28 MAY 2010

is obvious that they knew the ball bearing would not hold up with the Hamilton Standard 2B20 prop, and the higher compression ratio placed more stress demands on the crankshaft. With a constant-speed prop, the engine drives a governor, which may also place additional

stress on the crankshaft. To understand what must be done to the front and rear main ball bearings during overhaul, one must consult the W-670 overhaul manual. The overhaul manual calls for only an inspection of the bearing, not for mandatory replace-

Figure 1 Figure 1 shows a typical front and rear ball bearing as used in the Continental W-670 radial engine. These bearings are the only support for the crankshaft, which produces only 15 hp less than the Wright R-760 bearings shown in Figure 2. On the left is the thrust, and on the right is the rear main ball bearing. The bearing contains an inner and outer race separated by hardened steel balls. To keep the rotating balls separated, there is a cage assembly, and it is this portion of the bearing assembly that apparently fails first. When the bearing in my Continental failed, large pieces of cage metal fell directly into the oil sump and therefore bypassed the main oil screen. The screen in my engine was completely devoid of any sign of metallic failure inside the engine. I was informed that the main oil screen in the most recent bearing failure showed traces of metal. Therefore it is most important to use a magnet and insert it into the oil sump after the oil has been drained. I have also fashioned a hook out of 3/32-inch-diameter welding rod to fish out fragments. If any metal is found in the engine oil sump, the airplane should not be flown, as it is most likely the start of rear main bearing failure.

ment at the overhaul cycle. If the engine logbook doesn’t specifically state that the bearings were replaced with new parts, you must assume used bearings were installed at overhaul with an unknown total time on them. Again it becomes obvious to me that the condition of these highly stressed main bearings is a judgment call by the overhauling facility or the individual mechanic. Therefore total operating hours on these bearings is unknown, yet it is these bearings that are the cause of several failures of Continental W-670 aircraft engines. Some failures are found during the beginning stage as the cage that holds the steel balls in place begins to disintegrate. Continued operation of the engine beyond this stage will eventually lead to complete failure of the rear main bearing and damage to the crankshaft, necessitating an immediate emergency landing of the airplane in terrain that may not be too hospitable for such an event. In the event the bearing completely fails, the crankshaft rear main is free to move wherever loads will take it. Think of what this movement would do to the master rod, link rods, and moving parts in the accessory section. Remember the old saying: “Flying is many hours of boredom separated by a few moments of stark terror!” I have a friend in Lodi, California, who has lot of experience overhauling and operating Continental W-670 engines. His name is Peter Precissi, and for many years, the family owned and operated the largest fleet of Travel Air 4000 dusters in the United States. The airplanes carried sulfur dust applied to wine grapes to prevent mold. Peter told me they overhauled engines every 600 hours’ time-in-service, they had experienced several failures of the rear main bearing, and the part was the weakest part of the Continental engine. He also indicated that they began installing roller bearings to combat this problem. Keep in mind that the Precissi Travel Airs were

My Travel Air 4000, NR3670 serial number 288, with a Precissi overhauled engine and prop.

Figure 2 Figure 2 shows the Wright R-760 main bearing arrangement. Note that the Wright has (from left to right) a front thrust ball bearing, a center main roller bearing, and a rear solid main bearing. The crankshaft size for the Wright is SAE 30. That’s rather substantial when compared to the Continental W-670 with its smaller SAE 20-sized crankshaft. Alignment of the three bearings in the Wright is critical; therefore the rear main bearing must be linebored to fit the rear main journal in the crankshaft. Replacement of main bearings in a Wright engine is much more difficult than in a Continental. The Wright main bearing arrangement is built like a brick outhouse!

Figure 3 operated under CAR Part 8 (now FAR Part 137), and modifications were somewhat easier to accomplish when an aircraft was certified in the Restricted Category than on an airplane certified in the Standard Category. The blue and yellow Precissi Travel Airs prowled the air around Sacramento for decades until recently when they were retired. All are now in the hands of private owners who will restore them to their stock condition, except for one airplane that has been donated to the California Agriculture Museum in Tulare, California. There, in all its glory, is the airplane flown by Peter’s uncle Joe for many years.

Figure 3 shows replacement Continental W-670 front and rear main roller bearings. An STC is required to install these bearings, since this modification is an alteration to the original engine type cer tificate. On the upper left is a rear main bearing, and to its right is a front main replacement roller bearing. The contact sur face is much greater on a roller bearing compared to a ball bearing, so bearing failures on the Continental should be eliminated by changing to the roller bearing. The large bearing is a Wright front main roller bearing with its inner race removed to clearly illustrate the appearance of a roller bearing. VINTAGE AIRPLANE 29

It is my firm belief that all W-670 engines should have the rear main ball bearing replaced with a supplemental type certified roller bearing as soon as possible, or at least when the engine is due an overhaul. To install this bearing in the engine requires an FAA supplemental type certificate (STC), since it is a modification of the original engine type design. Only holders of an STC should perform this task; donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t allow anybody to install a bearing without an STC approval. An entry in the engine logbook and an FAA Form 337 should accompany the engine when it returns from the overhaul facility. Make sure the FAA Form 337 is filled out completely; then send the original copy to the FAA records branch and place the second copy in the aircraft records file. Since STC approvals for installations of roller-type rear main bearings are a recent occurrence (within the past 10 years), many engines are in service with original balltype rear main bearings. If a person is looking to buy an airplane powered by a Continental W-670 engine (other than a W-670-23), check logbooks and paperwork to see if this modification has been accomplished. If no record can be found, then you must assume that the modification has not been accomplished during the last overhaul or engine disassembly. If this is the case, an owner must pay particular attention for any fragments that may appear in the engine oil sump. I always change oil every 25 hours of operation and always drain the oil sump. I have previously described how to check for rear main bearing failures. But it may be worth repeating at this time. The following information represents my opinions based on personal experience. I would encourage other folks in the aviation industry who have additional ideas or information to contact any Type Club or the Vintage Aircraft Association with their thoughts and opinions. In this way, we can disseminate vital safety information.

30 MAY 2010

Figure 4 Figure 4 shows a por tion of the Continental rear main ball bearing assembly. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve tried to show the bearing cage assembly in some detail. It is this cage assembly that holds the steel balls in place, and fragments of this portion of the bearing will be found in the sump. Fragments may not go to the oil screen because the scavenge pump will not draw them out of the sump; therefore, no fragments will likely be found in the main oil screen. When my bearing failed, fragments up to 1 inch in length were found in the oil sump when the plug was removed.

Figure 5 In Figure 5, you can see the entire Continental W-670 crankshaft/bearing assembly. It shows the front and rear main ball bearings in their correct location. The master rod and link rods have not been installed for this photograph. Between the front main bearing and propeller splines, there is a threaded section. The thrust bearing is located at this position against a spacer. The thrust bearing, spacer, oil slinger ring, and thrust nut are installed after the nose case is assembled.

My experience with rear main bearing failures shows me that: •The rear main ball bearings do not suddenly fail, rather the support cage begins to disintegrate, leaving the unsupported bearing balls still in place between the inner and outer races. As the engine continues operation, the bearing will catastrophically fail, requiring an immediate emergency landing in whatever terrain the airplane is flying over. It has been reported to me that a pending bearing failure will show an increase in the oil temperature with an associated drop in pressure. If the bearing fails completely, there will be no true support on the crankshaft rear main journal and the engine will begin internal disassembly, which will lead to failure of the engine. Heavy vibrations will accompany the failure mode. • It makes no difference what type of prop is installed—Hamilton Standard, McCauley, or wood. If the bearing is going to fail, it’s

going to fail! How long it takes the bearing assembly to fail after the cage fails is anybody’s guess. However, let me state that if fragments of the bearing cage are found in the engine sump, do not operate the engine again! • If I were operating a Continental W-670 radial engine (and I have a W-670 engine installed in our Stearman), I would immediately check the records to see if the engine had been previously modified to incorporate a rear main roller bearing in accordance with an STC. If not, I would have the engine torn down and a roller bearing installed. That will eliminate the problem. If the engine is low time since overhaul, the cylinders can be removed and inspected with associated disassembly of the power section and installation of the new roller bearing. I would think the investment for the installation of a roller bearing would far outweigh the consequences of waiting for the ball bearing to fail. I would be inter-

ested in the opinions of others on the subject of Continental W-670 rear main ball bearing failures. The more this is discussed, the better off we’ll all be. Review the photos and their extended captions for a closer look at the bearings. It is my mission, through this column, to identify this potential engine problem with operators of Continental W-670 (R-670) 220-hp radial engines. I would appreciate receiving input from the field regarding any experience with rear main bearing failures. I would guess that most Continental W-670 220-hp radial engines are installed on Travel Air, Waco, and Boeing Stearman aircraft, with other types of aircraft representing a smaller number of engines in use at this time. Remember, if your engine logbook does not show installation of roller bearings and if there is no FAA Form 337 showing this major alteration, then you have to assume that ball bearings are installed.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 31

by H.G. FRAUTSCHY

MYSTERY PLANE This month’s Mystery Plane comes to us from the EAA archives.

Send your answer to EAA, Vintage Airplane, P.O. Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086. Your answer needs to be in no later than June 20 for inclusion in

the August 2010 issue of Vintage Airplane. You can also send your response via e-mail. Send your answer to mysteryplane@eaa.org.

Be sure to include your name plus your city and state in the body of your note and put “(Month) Mystery Plane” in the subject line.

FEBRUARY’S MYSTERY ANSWER

32 MAY 2010

he February Mystery Plane came to us via Wes Smith of Springfield, Illinois. Here’s the answer from Jack Erickson of State College, Pennsylvania. The February 2010 Mystery Plane seems to be the first of the two Fairchild Aircraft Ltd. (Canada) 4580 Sekani, c/n 101, CF-BHD, light transport sesquiplanes for 10-12 passengers to be built. A second was built as c/n 102, CF-BHE. Both were powered by a pair of nine-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Jr. SB engines of 400 hp each. The information here is principally from the Putnam book Canadian Aircraft since 1909 by K.M. Molson & H.A. Taylor. The same photograph of CF-BHD as yours is in this reference, as well as a photo of CF-BHE on wheel-mounted skis. There is a photo of a Sekani on floats on the Aerofiles.com website as well, but I could not tell of which aircraft. The aircraft were designed and built in 1936-1937 by a team under new Fairchild chief engineer and general manager Nathan F. Vanderlipp. The factory and its airfield were in Longueuil, Quebec. Both aircraft were fi rst fl own by Alexander Schneider. The aircraft was unsuccessful for its planned usage as a light passenger transport and aerial photography platform for several reasons. The aircraft were overweight and lacked the desired rate of climb and ceiling. Also, the handling qualities were not good, and the structure exhibited some weakness. Finally, neither civilian customers nor the Royal Canadian Air Force saw them as being useful aircraft for their mission requirements.

Lars Gleitsmann, of Anchorage, Alaska, and Tom Lymburn of Minneapolis, Minnesota, both pointed out what is a rather humorous story that goes along with the shortcomings mentioned above. It probably wasn’t very funny at the time, but today… Lars wrote: “After its first flight, the company test pilot Alec Schneider chased the designer and general manager N.F. Vanderlipp around the factory with the engine-starting hand crank! The plane had really bad flight characteristics and was also too heavy, yet was structurally weak. Only two were built. Some others had been started; all were scrapped. Kent A. Mitchell’s book Fairchild Aircraft 1926-1987 tells the whole story and has the very same photo in it.” Other correct answers were received from Hillis Cunliffe, Millbrook, Alabama; Timothy Dubé, Orléans, Ontario, Canada; and Russ Norman, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

AERO CLASSIC “COLLECTOR SERIES”

Vintage Tires New USA Production Show off your pride and joy with a fresh set of Vintage Rubber. These newly minted tires are FAA-TSO’d and speed rated to 120 MPH. Some things are better left the way they were, and in the 40’s and 50’s, these tires were perfectly in tune to the exciting times in aviation. Not only do these tires set your vintage plane apart from the rest, but also look exceptional on all General Aviation aircraft. Deep 8/32nd tread depth offers above average tread life and UV treated rubber resists aging. First impressions last a lifetime, so put these jewels on and bring back the good times..… New General Aviation Sizes Available:

500 x 5, 600 x 6, 700 x 8

Desser has the largest stock and selection of Vintage and Warbird tires in the world. Contact us with your requirements. Telephone: 800-247-8473 or 323-721-4900 FAX: 323-721-7888 6900 Acco St., Montebello, CA 90640 3400 Chelsea Ave, Memphis, TN 38106 In Support Of Aviation Since 1920….

www.desser.com

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 33

sale

VINTAGE MERCHANDISE Airplane Pillows and Shams

Create a landing pad for each plane in your livingroom, bedroom, or study. Flying throughout the set are wonderful, detailed embroidery and appliquĂŠ works of vintage airplanes using delicate quilt stitching lines that add detail and style. Pillow covers zip off for gentle cleaning. 16x16 Red & Blue Plane on Lite Blue PLU 5262615900000 16x16 Red Plane& Navy Wings on White PLU 5262616200000

16x16 Blue & Red Plane on White PLU 5262616100000

Pillows

$10.95

16x16 Plaid Edges & Blue Plane PLU 5262615800000 16x16 Blue Biplane on White PLU 5262616000000

Shams

16x16 Green with Blue Plane PLU 5262615600000

$14.95

Telephone Orders: 800-843-3612 From US and Canada (All Others Call 920-426-5912)

20 x 26 Pillow Sham PLU 5262616500000 34 MAY 2010

Or send to: EAA Mail Orders, P.O. Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086 Limited supplies available.

20 x 26 Pillow Sham PLU 5262616300000

*Shipping and handling NOT included. Major credit cards accepted. WI residents add 5% sales tax.

Order online: www.shopeaa.com

Norms Cub T-Shirt This t-shirt is made of 100% preshrunk cotton. Choose from four earth tone colors- spruce, yellow, blue and green. If your favorite airplane is a Cub, this t-shirt is for you. Spruce: SM- PLU 5263661100000 LG- PLU 5263661300000 XL- PLU 5263661400000 2X- PLU 5263661500000 Express Yellow M- PLU 5263662400000 LG- PLU 5263662500000 XL- PLU 5263662600000 2X- PLU 5263662700000 3X- PLU 5263662800000 River Blue M- PLU 5263660600000 LG- PLU 5263660700000 XL- PLU 5263660800000 2X- PLU 5263660900000 3X- PLU 5263661000000 Cactus Green S- PLU 5263661700000 LG- PLU 5263661900000 XL- PLU 5263662000000 2X- PLU 5263662100000 3X- PLU 5263662200000

Cactus Green

$4.50 ea.

River Blue

Express Yellow

Spruce

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 35

Vintage Instructor THE

BY Steve Krog, CFI

Landings—forced and otherwise t was too rainy and foggy to do any flight training today, so I started scanning through a foot-tall stack of tagged articles set aside to read in the future and came across the most recent FAA Preliminary Accident Data. I find it to be a good source for giving me reminders on what I should reinforce with students during their pilot training. The accident data reviewed covered just the first nine days of March, in which there were 91 preliminary accident reports on file— that included 21 forced landings and 25 landing accidents. Onehalf of all accidents reported in the nine-day period involved either forced landings or landing accidents. Quite a startling statistic! As we begin the activities of a new flying season and enjoy the pleasures of our vintage airplanes, we need to prepare not only the airplane for a summer of fun, safe flying, but also ourselves—especially for the potential of a forced landing. Forced landings and learning how to deal with them are among the prerequisites in preparation for taking the private or sport pilot checkrides. Time is spent selecting a field, setting up for the landing, and accomplishing a number of cockpit checks prior to the landing. All designated examiners are required to test the student candidate on forced landings, and most

36 MAY 2010

students are adequately trained to deal with the situation.

Even after taking all the preflight cautions, the potential exists that you could have to land your airplane away from an airport, or at the very least land at an airport within gliding distance. However, once flight training is completed and the checkride satisfactorily passed, few pilots, regardless of experience, will take the time to practice this maneuver and remain proficient. Back in the 1970s when this country was dealing with the Arab oil embargo, aviation fuel was

rationed. Traveling cross-country was sometimes a hair-raising event, as many airports would allow only an 8-gallon purchase of avfuel per engine. Trying to deliver a fuel-hungry Cherokee Six300 from eastern South Dakota to southern California was a series of takeoffs, short hops, and landings after exhausting the fuel supply taken on at the departure-point fixed base operator. It doesn’t take long to consume 84 gallons at 17 gallons per hour! During this period of time there was a rash of forced landings due to fuel starvation. The FAA took note and renewed the effort to teach individuals about forced landings. Since that time, avfuel availability hasn’t been a problem and many pilots have become lax in understanding and executing simulated forced landings. Skills diminished, and today we’re seeing growing numbers of forced-landing accidents. The cause is twofold: fuel starvation, followed by lack of planning. Well more than half of the off-field landings are due to fuel mismanagement, and almost half of the serious forced landings occurred during or just after takeoff when the pilot attempted to return to the airport and land. When was the last time you gave thought to a potential forced landing or even practiced a simulated one? Did the fl ight instructor who gave you your last fl ight

review have you demonstrate a simulated forced landing? And if so, how did you do? Had the forced landing been real rather than simulated would you have been able to safely get your airplane on the ground? One of the best lessons I learned was taught to me by an old-time barnstormer and crop duster just after receiving my private pilot certificate. During the checkout in one of his airplanes, he taught me situational awareness long before the FAA ever grabbed on to that phrase. While checking me out, every two to three minutes he asked where I would land if the engine quit at that given moment. It was an exercise that has stuck with me ever since, and I’ve shared it with every student of mine over the past 35 years. A forced landing can definitely ruin an otherwise great flying day. Even after taking all the preflight cautions, the potential exists that you could have to land your airplane away from an airport, or at the very least land at an airport within gliding distance. How have you prepared yourself to handle this potential problem? There is very little written about forced landings in most primary flight-training manuals. Other than reminding you to pick a field, establish the best glide speed for the aircraft being flown, and land, little more is offered. To find more information, one needs to look through years of aviation magazines or conduct an extensive Internet search for additional helpful data. Let’s take a look at the basics. The most important first step when experiencing a forced landing is to keep flying the airplane! Then execute the following steps: 1. Immediately establish the best glide speed attitude for your airplane and keep the airplane in that attitude. 2. Select a field in which to land. 3. Plan your approach into the field.

4. When items 1-3 have been accomplished, try to identify why the engine is causing you to execute a forced landing. a. Is the fuel selector valve ON? b. Is the fuel selector properly positioned on the fullest tank of fuel? c. Move the mixture control to FULL RICH, if your airplane has a mixture control. d. If the engine is still partially producing power, apply carburetor heat. e. Conduct a magneto c h e c k . Yo u m a y h a v e experienced the partial failure of one magneto causing the engine to run quite rough. If you have been able to complete all of the checks and the problem still exists, it’s time to prepare for the forced landing. While continuing with and/or adjusting your approach to the selected field, you’ll want to do the following: 1. Move the mixture control to FULL OFF. 2. Shut the fuel OFF. 3. Shut the master switch OFF. 4. Position the magneto switch in the OFF position. 5. UNLATCH the cabin door. The ultimate goal now is to continue to fly the airplane and touch down in your selected field with the airplane flying as slowly as possible but still well under control! Tube, fabric, and aluminum can be repaired or replaced. The human body is much more difficult to repair. If the field you’ve selected is rough, allow the airplane to absorb the impact. Save yourself and your passenger(s). There are some common everyday exercises a pilot can practice to ensure a safe off-field forced landing. Here are a few that I practice with every student. When taking off, take a mo-

ment and ask yourself this: 1. If the engine quits before leaving the ground, what would I do? 2. If the engine quits just after takeoff, what would I do and where would I go? 3. If the engine quits before reaching at least 500 feet above ground level, where would I go? Refamiliarize yourself with not only your home-base field, but also every field in the area to which you regularly fly. Referring back to the old-timer who taught me a valuable life lesson when flying, I regularly ask students where they would land at different points during and after takeoff as well as in the traffic pattern. For training purposes we do practice forced landings from all of the points. The goal here is to break the automatic thought of attempting to return to the airport via the impossible 180-degree turn. (There’s an article on that topic in the April issue of Sport Aviation, along with a spirited discussion in the Flight Instructor HQ forum on EAA’s www. Oshkosh365.org website.—HGF) During the training (or local pleasure) flight, remain aware of the surface wind direction. If the wind was from the south when departing for the hour-long flight, it will probably remain from that direction during the flight. Having good knowledge of the surface wind will help when selecting a field for a forced landing. When flying cross-country it is fairly easy to remain aware of the surface wind direction through pilotage. Look at the ripple or wave action on bodies of water. The shoreline where the water is smooth will tell you that the wind is coming from that direction. (Seaplane pilots know that smooth area as the “wind shadow.”) Trees, when in foliage, are also a good indicator. Look at the leaves. They’re moving away from the wind. Smoke is also an excellent indicator. Large flags located in residential yards or

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 37

VINTAGE TRADER S o m e t h i n g t o b u y, s e l l , o r t r a d e ?

Classified Word Ads: $5.50 per 10 words, 180 words maximum, with boldface lead-in on first line. Classified Display Ads: One column wide (2.167 inches) by 1, 2, or 3 inches high at $20 per inch. Black and white only, and no frequency discounts. Adver tising Closing Dates: 10th of second month prior to desired issue date (i.e., January 10 is the closing date for the March issue). VAA reser ves the right to reject any adver tising in conflict with its policies. Rates cover one insertion per issue. Classified ads are not accepted via phone. Payment must accompany order. Word ads may be sent via fax (920-426-6845) or e-mail (classads@eaa.org) using credit card payment (all cards accepted). Include name on card, complete address, type of card, card number, and expiration date. Make checks payable to EAA. Address advertising correspondence to EAA Publications Classified Ad Manager, P.O. Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086.

EAA Calendar of Aviation Events Is Now Online EAA’s online Calendar of Events is the “go-to” spot on the Web to list and find aviation events in your area. The user-friendly, searchable format makes it the perfect webbased tool for planning your local trips to a fly-in. In EAA’s online Calendar of Events, you can search for events at any given time within a certain radius of any airport by entering the identifier or a ZIP code, and you can further define your search to look for just the types of events you’d like to attend. We invite you to access the EAA online Calendar of Events at http://www.eaa.org/calendar/

Upcom ing M ajor F l y - I ns Virginia Regional Festival of Flight Suffolk Executive Airport (SFQ) Suffolk, Virginia May 22-23, 2010 www.VirginiaFlyIn.org

AIRCRAFT

Golden West Regional Fly-In and Air Show Yuba County Airport (MYV) Marysville, California June 11-13, 2010 www.GoldenWestFlyIn.org

1941 Grumman G-44 Super Widgeon. 6471 TT, GO-480’s, Link Conversion. Flown by CAP in 1942; sunk German U-Boat off coast of New Jersey. (Painting of sinking in Smithsonian) $235,000.00 mrtope@yahoo.com or 907-250-9083

Arlington Fly-In Arlington Municipal Airport (AWO) Arlington, Washington July 7-11, 2010 www.ArlingtonFlyIn.org

MISCELLANEOUS Flying wires available. 1994 pricing. Visit www.flyingwires.com or call 800-517-9278. AIRPLANE T-SHIRTS 150 different airplanes available. WE PROBABLY HAVE YOUR AIRPLANE! www.airplanetshirts. com or call 1-800-645-7739. We also do Custom T-shirts and Caps for Clubs. www.aerolist.org, Aviations’ Leading Marketplace Are you tired of hauling to EAA every year? Storage units available for rent as low as $50/month less than 1 mile from EAA grounds. Call Todd @ (920)850-0502.

SERVICES Always Flying Aircraft Restoration, LLC: Annual Inspections, Airframe recovering, fabric repairs and complete restorations. Wayne A. Forshey A&P & I.A. 740-472-1481 Ohio and bordering states Biplane Builder Ltd. Restoration, fabric, paint, fabrications, paperwork. with 53 completed projects, Wacos, Moth’s, Champs, Pitts etc. Test flights and delivery. Indiana 812-343-8879 mike@ biplanebuilder.com, www.biplanebuilder.com 38 MAY 2010

EAA AirVenture Oshkosh Wittman Regional Airport (OSH) Oshkosh, Wisconsin July 26-August 1, 2010 www.AirVenture.org Colorado Sport International Air Show and Rocky Mountain Regional Fly-In Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport (BJC) Denver, Colorado August 28-29 2010 www.COSportAviation.org Mid-Eastern Regional Fly-In Grimes Field Airport (I74), Urbana, Ohio September 11-12, 2010 www.MERFI.info Copperstate Fly-In Casa Grande Municipal Airport (CGZ) Casa Grande, Arizona October 21-23, 2010 www.COPPERSTATE.org Southeast Regional Fly-In Middleton Field Airport (GZH) Evergreen, Alabama October 22-24, 2010 www.SERFI.org Fo r d e t a i l s o n h u n d re d s o f u p co m i n g av i at i o n happenings, including EAA chapter fly-ins, Young Eagles rallies, and other local aviation events, visit the EAA Calendar of Events located at www.eaa.org/calendar.

instructor continued from page 37

in front of businesses also tell you what the surface wind is doing. While flying cross-country get in the habit of looking for suitable fields in which to land—if the engine would quit at that instant. During the two- to three-hour dual crosscountry flight made with students, I’ll ask them to point out fields along our route of flight. Then I’ll have them simulate a forced landing into one of the fields selected along each leg of the training flight. When returning to your home field after an hour-long pleasure flight, at what point is your airplane most likely to experience an engine problem? I’m sure you all answered the question by thinking, it’s obvious; an engine problem is most likely to occur when the power is significantly reduced. That point is on downwind abeam the numbers of the runway you’ve selected for landing. If this is the critical point in the flight where an engine problem is most likely to occur, when was the last time you practiced a no-power approach and landing from that point? If traffic flow at your airport allows, practice the no-power approach a time or two every month. If traffic activity doesn’t allow you to practice this maneuver, try it at a nearby airport that is less busy. You’ll amaze yourself, first, because you’ve become somewhat lax after flying the normal approach and, second, after a few practice attempts you’ll renew your understanding of your airplane and what you need to do to execute an altered traffic pattern to make a safe no-power approach and landing. Spending a little time practicing for a potential forced landing will sharpen your skills, making you a better and safer pilot. Flying is a challenge and also a lot of fun. With a little practice we will all be able to do it more safely. And isn’t that what it’s all about?

Douglas DC-3

continued from page 17

combinations tied into a general uneasiness among passengers. The DC-3 did not use certain shades of green, since tests revealed it gave some passengers balance problems and airsickness. Certain patterns in colors, although the colors were satisfactory, also caused passenger discomfort. Carpets in the DC-3 were dark to give the feeling of strength and security underfoot. The walls and ceiling were light in color to prevent an uncomfortable feeling of confinement and evoke a feeling of “airiness and freedom.” On December 17, 1935, the DC-3 began to move down the runway at Clover Field, slowly at first, but within 1,000 feet, it lifted off effortlessly. The lives of millions of people throughout the world for decades to come were about to change. In contrast to maiden flights of today’s aircraft, covered extensively by the media, this flight, like the maiden flight of the DC-1, went virtually unnoticed by the press, but turned out to be one of the most significant events of the 20th century. The historic flight drew so little corporate attention that no one thought to photograph the moment. The DST configuration was the first aircraft off the production line. American Airlines used it in a day-plane configuration until the DC-3 came off the line in September 1936. Coast-tocoast air travel on American Airlines’ new DST sleeper service began on September 18, 1936. American’s DC-3 “Flagship Mercury Service” reduced

coast-to-coast time to 15 hours westbound and 19.5 hours eastbound. The fare was $269.90 round trip. American Airlines’ DC-3/DST was the first American aircraft to have hot kitchen facilities. No longer did captive passengers have to eat boxed lunches consisting of a cold sandwich and a piece of fruit. Now flight attendants served hot, full-course meals—and they were free. American Airlines offered meals served on genuine Syracuse china, with Reed and Barton silverware. Wild rice pancakes with blueberry syrup, cheese omelets or julienne of ham omelets were the breakfast choices. For dinner there was chicken Kiev, duckling a l’orange, breast of chicken Jeannette, strip sirloin, or filet mignon, served with a choice of salads and pastries for dessert. Luncheons were light, featuring consommé, fried chicken, peas, and mashed potatoes, with ice cream and chocolate sundaes for dessert. In 1936, the DC-3 helped American Airlines show its first profit in years—$4,590. By 1937, its earnings were up more than $1,400,000, with a 22 percent increase in revenue passengers. The DC-3 enabled the airline to fly passengers only and show a profit. We’ll continue the history of the DC-3 in next month’s Vintage Airplane. Part 2 will cover the C-47, and Part 3, which will be published in the July issue, will cover postwar civilian use, Vietnam, and turbo conversions of the world-renowned Douglas Commercial product, the DC-3.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 39

VINTAGE AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION OFFICERS President Geoff Robison 1521 E. MacGregor Dr. New Haven, IN 46774 260-493-4724 chief7025@aol.com

Vice-President George Daubner N57W34837 Pondview Ln Oconomowoc, WI 53066 262-560-1949 gdaubner@eaa.org

Secretary Steve Nesse 2009 Highland Ave. Albert Lea, MN 56007 507-373-1674 stnes2009@live.com

DIRECTORS

Steve Bender 85 Brush Hill Road Sherborn, MA 01770 508-653-7557 sst10@comcast.net

Jeannie Hill P.O. Box 328 Harvard, IL 60033-0328 815-943-7205

David Bennett 375 Killdeer Ct Lincoln, CA 95648 916-645-8370 antiquer@inreach.com

Espie “Butch” Joyce 704 N. Regional Rd. Greensboro, NC 27409 336-668-3650 windsock@aol.com

Jerry Brown 4605 Hickory Wood Row Greenwood, IN 46143 317-422-9366 lbrown4906@aol.com

Dan Knutson 106 Tena Marie Circle Lodi, WI 53555 608-592-7224 lodicub@charter.net

Dave Clark 635 Vestal Lane Plainfield, IN 46168 317-839-4500 davecpd@att.net

Steve Krog 1002 Heather Ln. Hartford, WI 53027 262-966-7627 sskrog@aol.com

John S. Copeland 1A Deacon Street Northborough, MA 01532 508-393-4775 copeland1@juno.com

Robert D. “Bob” Lumley 1265 South 124th St. Brookfield, WI 53005 262-782-2633 lumper@execpc.com

Phil Coulson 28415 Springbrook Dr. Lawton, MI 49065 269-624-6490 rcoulson516@cs.com

S.H. “Wes” Schmid 2359 Lefeber Avenue Wauwatosa, WI 53213 414-771-1545 shschmid@gmail.com

Dale A. Gustafson 7724 Shady Hills Dr. Indianapolis, IN 46278 317-293-4430 dalefaye@msn.com

Membership Services Directory Enjoy the many benefits of EAA and EAA’s Vintage Aircraft Association Phone (920) 426-4800

Robert C. Brauer 9345 S. Hoyne Chicago, IL 60643 773-779-2105 photopilot@aol.com

E.E. “Buck” Hilbert 8102 Leech Rd. Union, IL 60180 815-923-4591 buck7ac@gmail.com

Gene Chase 2159 Carlton Rd. Oshkosh, WI 54904 920-231-5002 GRCHA@charter.net

Gene Morris 5936 Steve Court Roanoke, TX 76262 817-491-9110 genemorris@charter.net

Ronald C. Fritz 15401 Sparta Ave. Kent City, MI 49330 616-678-5012 rFritz@pathwaynet.com

John Turgyan PO Box 219 New Egypt, NJ 08533 609-758-2910 jrturgyan4@aol.com

Fax (920) 426-4873

Web Sites: www.vintageaircraft.org, www.airventure.org, www.eaa.org/memberbenefits E-Mail: vintageaircraft@eaa.org

EAA and Division Membership Services (8:00 AM–7:00 PM Monday–Friday CST) membership@eaa.org 800-564-6322 FAX 920-426-4873 www.eaa.org/memberbenefits •New/renew memberships •Address changes •Merchandise sales •Gift memberships EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 888-322-4636 www.airventure.org Sport Pilot/Light-Sport Aircraft Hotline 877-359-1232 www.sportpilot.org Programs and Activities Auto Fuel STCs 920-426-4843 EAA Air Academy 920-426-6880 www.airacademy.org EAA Scholarships 920-426-6823 Flight Instructor information 920-426-6801 www.eaa.org/nafi Library Services/Research 920-426-4848 Benefits AUA Vintage Insurance Plan 800-727-3823 www.auaonline.com EAA Aircraft Insurance Plan 866-647-4322 www.eaa.org/memberbenefits EAA VISA Card 800-853-5576 ext. 8884 EAA Hertz Rent-A-Car Program 800-654-2200 www.eaa.org/hertz EAA Enterprise Rent-A-Car Program 877-421-3722 www.eaa.org/enterprise Editorial 920-426-4825 www.vintageaircraft.org VAA Office FAX 920-426-6579

airventure@eaa.org sportpilot@eaa.org dwalker@eaa.or airacademy@eaa.org scholarships@eaa.org tdeimer@eaa.org slurvey@eaa.org

membership@eaa.org membership@eaa.org membership@eaa.org vintage@eaa.org tbooks@eaa.org

EAA Members Information Line 888-EAA-INFO (322-4636) Use this toll-free number for: information about AirVenture Oshkosh; aeromedical and technical aviation questions; chapters; and Young Eagles. Please have your membership number ready when calling. Office hours are 8:15 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (Monday - Friday, CST)

MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION EAA Membership in the Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. is $40 for one year, including 12 issues of SPORT AVIATION. Family membership is an additional $10 annually. Junior Membership (under 19 years of age) is available at $23 annually. All major credit cards accepted for membership. (Add $16 for Foreign Postage.)

EAA SPORT PILOT

DIRECTORS EMERITUS

EAA Aviation Center, PO Box 3086, Oshkosh WI 54903-3086

Current EAA members may add EAA SPORT PILOT magazine for an additional $20 per year. EAA Membership and EAA SPORT PILOT magazine is available for $40 per year (SPORT AVIATION magazine not included). (Add $16 for Foreign Postage.)

VINTAGE AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION Current EAA members may join the Vintage Aircraft Association and receive VINTAGE AIRPLANE magazine for an additional $36 per year. EAA Membership, VINTAGE AIRPLANE magazine and one year membership in the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association is available for $46 per year (SPORT AVIATION magazine not included). (Add $7 for Foreign Postage.)

receive SPORT AEROBATICS magazine for an additional $45 per year. EAA Membership, SPORT AEROBATICS magazine and one year membership in the IAC Division is available for $55 per year (SPORT AVIATION magazine not included). (Add $18 for Foreign Postage.)

WARBIRDS Current EAA members may join the EAA Warbirds of America Division and receive WARBIRDS magazine for an additional $45 per year. EAA Membership, WARBIRDS magazine and one year membership in the Warbirds Division is available for $55 per year (SPORT AVIATION magazine not included). (Add $7 for Foreign Postage.)

FOREIGN MEMBERSHIPS Please submit your remittance with a check or draft drawn on a United States bank payable in United States dollars. Add required Foreign Postage amount for each membership.

IAC

Current EAA members may join the International Aerobatic Club, Inc. Division and TM

Membership dues to EAA and its divisions are not tax deductible as charitable contributions

Copyright ©2010 by the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association, All rights reserved. VINTAGE AIRPLANE (USPS 062-750; ISSN 0091-6943) is published and owned exclusively by the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association of the Experimental Aircraft Association and is published monthly at EAA Aviation Center, 3000 Poberezny Rd., PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54903-3086, e-mail: vintageaircraft@eaa.org. Membership to Vintage Aircraft Association, which includes 12 issues of Vintage Airplane magazine, is $36 per year for EAA members and $46 for non-EAA members. Periodicals Postage paid at Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901 and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Vintage Airplane, PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086. PM 40063731 Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to Pitney Bowes IMS, Station A, PO Box 54, Windsor, ON N9A 6J5. FOREIGN AND APO ADDRESSES — Please allow at least two months for delivery of VINTAGE AIRPLANE to foreign and APO addresses via surface mail. ADVERTISING — Vintage Aircraft Association does not guarantee or endorse any product offered through the advertising. We invite constructive criticism and welcome any report of inferior merchandise obtained through our advertising so that corrective measures can be taken. EDITORIAL POLICY: Members are encouraged to submit stories and photographs. Policy opinions expressed in articles are solely those of the authors. Responsibility for accuracy in reporting rests entirely with the contributor. No remuneration is made. Material should be sent to: Editor, VINTAGE AIRPLANE, PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086. Phone 920-426-4800. EAA® and EAA SPORT AVIATION®, the EAA Logo® and Aeronautica™ are registered trademarks, trademarks, and service marks of the Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. The use of these trademarks and service marks without the permission of the Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. is strictly prohibited.

40 MAY 2010

GET NO YOUR W TIC & S KE AV TS

75th Anniversary of DC-3s: 50 plus DC-3s will be ﬂocking to join the AirVenture birthday bash

Opening day concert by Chicago Monday, July 26, presented by Ford Motor Company

More than 800 Exhibitors It’s the world’s largest aviation shopping mall!

The World’s Greatest Aviation Celebration | July 26 – August 1 | www.airventure.org

Salute to Veterans a week-long celebration featuring Collection of World War I ﬂying replicas special Vietnam-era Air Show and on display & taking to the sky the 75th anniversary of the B-17

More than 500 Forums, Workshops & Presentations

Night Air Show Saturday night – FIRST EVER!