Tuesday, May 22, 2018

Think there could be a market for these with modern engines and avionics?


17 comments:

  1. Yes! But it'd cost about $5 million or more, and at that price yer gettin into small BizJet money.

    Sure is pretty though.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Saw one of these at a local airport last week. Still beautiful. https://www.baslerturbo.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Basler does DC-3 conversions to Turboprops.

      Delete
    2. A DC-3 will do for me. :)
      https://tinyurl.com/ybvqb9gr

      Delete
  3. My comment was the same as "B" above. I'd rather have a new business jet. More comfortable, faster, more fuel efficient and less maintenance.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As a passenger plane yes,,,,,there could be a great market for small airports to have such planes to pick up and deliver people to other small airports. Thus bypass the over crowded and very costly big airports found in every city.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Look close. I think Amelia's waving at us.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I would liken it to an old house. You can make it better. Just add money. I remember reading an article years ago that you could tell how much time a pilot had in DC-3s just by the amount of hydraulic fluid on his jacket. Apparently some of the lines ran behind the pilot's seat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barney, most of the hydraulic system is behind the pilot and copilot seats in a DC-3. I worked on 6 different DC-3s in the '80s and there were variations as to which side the accumulator and optional electric pump were on. In 1936 there were no electrically operated valves so the flap and landing gear valves are behind the copilot seat, bolted to the bulkhead post.

      https://www.maam.org/airshow/r4d_cockpit.htm

      Al_in_Ottawa

      Why is everyone discussing DC-3s? I'm not sure what the pictured plane is, but it is not a Dakosaurus Rex.

      Delete
  7. That would carry about twice the men or cargo as the USAF's C-21.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Lear 35/C-21 is a very tight fit for an executive aircraft. They're fast, but not all THAT comfortable depending on the seating configuration.

      Delete
    2. They are usually fitted for 8 passenger seats. They are a lot more comfortable than a C-130.

      Delete
  8. The split tail screams Lockheed and the roof line and cockpit scream Boeing....a BoeLock?....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Figured out it, it's a Lockheed Lodestar.

    Al_in_Ottawa

    ReplyDelete
  10. I did some digging. That airplane is a Lockheed XC-35. Lockheed rebuilt an Electra 10 (the modle Amelia Earhart was flying around the world) with a pressurized flight deck and passenger compartment. Lockheed made the windows smaller to ensure no blowouts from the differetial pressure.

    ReplyDelete
  11. if your desire in aircraft tends to round engines and split tails with a dash of comfort and a bit of speed(and you have the wherewithall to afford the fuel) I can only recommend the Howard 500.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Modern engines would ruin it for me-I love those loud, stinky, smoky round engines.
    Pretty plane.

    ReplyDelete