News:


  • May 01, 2024, 04:06:57 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?  (Read 2189 times)

Offline Clancy Arnold

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1453
  • I am 5 Ft. 8 In., the Taube is 7 Ft. 4 In.
Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« on: August 11, 2009, 01:50:31 PM »
Does this picture of a P-38 "At Sea" qualify it for Navy Carrier?

P-38 on the back of two ducks (DWK's) in WWII.

Clancy
Clancy Arnold
Indianapolis, IN   AMA 12560 LM-S
U/Tronics Control
U/Control with electronics added.

Offline Mike Anderson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2009, 03:05:05 PM »
Only if it landed there ..... on purpose!   n~

Mike@   AMA 10086
Central Iowa

Offline Clancy Arnold

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1453
  • I am 5 Ft. 8 In., the Taube is 7 Ft. 4 In.
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #2 on: August 11, 2009, 05:42:17 PM »
I do not have the pilots name to ask him but that is a short deck between two ducks (DWK's).

Clancy
Clancy Arnold
Indianapolis, IN   AMA 12560 LM-S
U/Tronics Control
U/Control with electronics added.

Offline bfrog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #3 on: August 11, 2009, 06:27:06 PM »
Would have been a dandy landing. Notice how the landing craft is going into the planes flight path!!!!! Makes for a very short deck!!!
Bob Frogner

Offline Clancy Arnold

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1453
  • I am 5 Ft. 8 In., the Taube is 7 Ft. 4 In.
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2009, 08:15:47 AM »
Looking at the picture, I wonder if that is the pilot thanking the LSO for guiding him onto that very narrow plank for his nose wheel.  Talk about landing on a dime!  LOL
Clancy
Clancy Arnold
Indianapolis, IN   AMA 12560 LM-S
U/Tronics Control
U/Control with electronics added.

Offline Mike Anderson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2009, 08:50:33 AM »
OK! Let's turn this boat into the wind and get her off again!

Mike@   AMA 10086
Central Iowa

Offline Balsa Butcher

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2357
  • High Desert Flier
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2009, 03:56:50 PM »
You know, if I were the event director and someone came up to me with a scale P-38 outfitted with an arrester hook and throttles, wanting to enter a carrier contest and presenting that picture as proof of its eligibility as a carrier plane, I'd accept it just to see the darn thing fly and deal with the protests (if any) later! 8)
Pete Cunha
Sacramento CA.
AMA 57499

Offline Mike Anderson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2009, 04:41:02 PM »
Absotively!!! y1   I would just make him operate off of ONE section of the deck..... VD~
Mike@   AMA 10086
Central Iowa

david smith

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2009, 06:47:35 PM »
If I could use a rocket assisted takeoff then I would probably try it!!

Offline john e. holliday

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22774
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #9 on: August 14, 2009, 09:24:12 AM »
I can vaguely remember a plane that was a twin engine with high wing known as a COIN fighter that showed pictures of it taking off and landing on a carrier deck.   But, was told in the past it was illegal as it had no arresting hook on the real airplane.  I mean if a plane could takeoff and land without a hook, why couldn't a model do the same and be legal as long as it stayed in the arresting area.  Nit picking rules again.  DOC Holliday
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Offline Balsa Butcher

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2357
  • High Desert Flier
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #10 on: August 14, 2009, 10:48:31 AM »
That would have been the North American OV-10.  It was used in both armed and unarmed configurations by both the Air Force and Marines during the Vietnam era. It is still used buy the Cal Fire (formerly CDF) as a fire spotter, tanker controller (Air Boss) and lead plane for the fire bombers... 8)
Pete Cunha
Sacramento CA.
AMA 57499

Offline don Burke

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1027
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #11 on: August 14, 2009, 12:09:08 PM »
I believe all the nit-picking about what's legal for carrier can be answered by looking at the AMA rules.  The only place where there is a requirement for "real carrier airplane" is in the bonus points section.  So you can fly anything you want, just no bonus points for non-proven carrier airplanes!
From the rules:
"3. Aircraft Requirements. Model must have a fixed or retractable landing gear. If a retractable gear is used, it must be lowered for landing. The model must be equipped with an arresting hook which when extended may not be longer than a one-third (1/3) the length of the fuselage. The model wingspan shall be 44 inches maximum for Class I and Class II and 50 inches maximum for the Profile Class. It is permissible to change the position of any control surface during flight. The model shall be rigged for counterclockwise flight. Models shall not exceed four (4) pounds weight in flight configuration, but without fuel. Autogiros and helicopters, or aircraft which rotate their propellers to a horizontal plane to act as rotors for hovering flight, are prohibited. Models (entries) shall be placed and compete in three (3) groups as follows.
3.1. Class I—Models having an engine displacement up to and including .4028 cubic inch.
3.2. Class II — Models having a minimum engine displacement of .4029 cubic inch to maximum of .6500 cubic inch. Class II will also include jet-type as outlined in the CL General section. Jet models shall be entered in Class II only.
3.3. Profile Class — All aircraft shall be of the profile fuselage type. Engine(s) must not be cowled in. Minimum wing area shall be 300 square inches. Models shall have a fixed landing gear consisting of at least a two-wheel main gear with at least four (4) inches separating the wheels. If a clear canopy is not used, the cockpit or canopy area must be defined with a contrasting color or color outline. It is encouraged that the plane outlines follow some type of Navy aircraft."
The requirements for bonus points is in section 8 of the rules.
"8. Bonus Points.
 8.1. A scale model of a carrier aircraft of any nation, provided it displays the national markings of the using nation, shall receive bonus points. A carrier aircraft is any man-carrying aircraft which was successfully flown and which meets at least one (1) of the following requirements: a. Aircraft made actual carrier-type takeoff and arrested landing on an actual or simulated carrier deck, or b. Aircraft is designated as a carrier aircraft by an acceptable source (in cases where actual carrier-type takeoff and arrested landing are not documented). 8.1.1. Scale three-view drawings of the full-scale aircraft and proof that the aircraft meets the above requirements must be submitted to be eligible for scale bonus points. (See Proof of Scale rules in the Unified Scale Judging section for acceptable sources of plans and documentation."
don Burke AMA 843
Menifee, CA

Offline don Burke

  • 2014 Supporters
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1027
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #12 on: August 14, 2009, 12:12:39 PM »
Sort of like the OV-10.  I watched a video this past week that showed a Fiesler Storch taking off and landing on the only carrier the German Kreigsmarine ever had.  No hook though!
don Burke AMA 843
Menifee, CA

Offline Dave Rolley

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #13 on: August 14, 2009, 02:39:28 PM »
I doubt the requirement for a hook on the full sized aircraft is a limitation any longer for the AMA event.  Ted Kraver has flown a C-130 in contests.

here is the write-up for the ship board trials:

http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c130_forrestal.asp

As to the P-38: (tongue firmly in cheek) http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p38_19.html

"The US Navy acquired four F-5Bs from the USAAF in North Africa. They were designated FO-1 and were assigned the BuNos 01209/01212. They were operated exclusively as land- based aircraft and never from carriers. Lockheed had proposed a carrier-based version of the Lightning, the Model 822, with folding wings, arrester hooks, and a strengthened airframe. However, the Navy looked askance at such a large aircraft on its carrier decks, and they disliked liquid-cooled engines for carrier-based planes. Consequently, this project never got past the paper stage."

Dave

Offline Peter Mazur

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 136
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #14 on: August 14, 2009, 08:55:03 PM »
The requirement for an "arrested landing" is generally interpreted to mean that a hook of some kind would be used to stop (arrest) the airplane. The OV10 and the C130 never had hooks as far as I know. (I could be wrong on the OV10, but I think I have it right on the C130.) The famous C130 landing used brakes and reverse thrust, but did not arrest. Too bad, it would be a neat subject. The same is true of the Faissler Storch: It landed, on a British carrier after the war, but never arrested. It would hardly need to, with a stall speed lower than the ship's speed plus typical wind velocity.
Pete

Offline skyshark58

  • skyshark58
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 401
Re: Does this picture qualify a P-38 for Navy Carrier?
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2009, 12:54:22 AM »
But the U-2 does because it had a hook and made quite a few arrested landings. But a 44 inch skinny wing makes the fuselage small, maybe 15 size.

                                                                                                                                                                                               Mike
mike potter


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here