DHC-2 cn 672

That’s a bit naive.

That’s a bit smug…
You did notice I said “looks like it only needs reassembly…” ? (Emphasis added).

1. Beavers in North America are working (and expensive) planes. Most that look anywhere near this good don’t tend to sit and rot, so probably not corroded from sitting outside unflown for years. Within 15 miles of me at two airports there is a Bonanza, an early 60s 172/182, Aztec, 310, Twin beech and Mooney Cadet. All those aircraft need restoration and make this ac look just off the assembly line.
2. With Kenmore mods indicate it was (fairly) recently worked on. It hasn’t been rotting since being surplused.
3. Nice paint. In my experience, planes left to rot in the “back 40” rarely have fresh paint.
4. If you’ve spent any time on DHC2.com, you’ll see plenty of neglected beat up/wrecked Beavers. This aircraft doe not appear to be one of them. I spent a day at Kenmore in the early 70s photographing recently surplused Army Beavers…after a few years at D-M and in the (lack of) care of foreign governments, many of those were rough.

Of course this one might have a run out engine (something that probably would not be done in the UK), dated avionics or tatty interior, after all the aircraft is 60+ years old. MY point was, whatever needs this ac may have, this Beaver is far better than most of the restorations I’ve been a part of or watched.

Now, If you’re done insulting me, allow me to point out the Hamilton Metalplane on floats in the background.
It’s the only flying example….

A friend knows the owner who reports it’s a beast to fly…and I’m sure the floats don’t improve its handling qualities any.

That’s a bit naive. One has no way of estimating the state of air-frame or engine from a photograph. My (impeccable) sources tell me she is on the way to the UK for restoration, so she obviously needs it!

It looks like it only needs reassembly, not restoring.

She was based in Washington, and obviously maintained by Kenmore, which is where she is being shipped from. (See here on Kenmore’s trailer):

I presume she has considerable airframe hours, and the current owner wishes her to be overhauled in the UK.

What kind of shape is it in that it needs rebuilding/restoring?
I notice from the photo that it has the newer side window, usually indicative of work done by Kenmore Air and among their many mods for the type.

Aha. I hope the info was of use.

Definitely. Many thanks.

Sorry – I’ve sacked the typist – USAF should have read USAC. Built as an L-20A but re-designated U-6A in 1962.

Aha. I hope the info was of use.

Sorry – I’ve sacked the typist – USAF should have read USAC. Built as an L-20A but re-designated U-6A in 1962.

Well it wouldn’t be the first time. She was originally registered 53-3718 with the USAF!

Doesn’t look like USAF to me: though I don’t have its post-55 IARC, the trail looks very much like US Army:

L-20A 53-3718
Contract AF-22529
Available 11Jun54
Accepted 24Jun54
Delivered 12Jul54
Toronto AMC 24Jun54 (new production)
To Sacramento AMA, McClellan AFB 12Jul54
San Francisco port of embarkation for sea transportation 16Aug54
Arrived, 6408th Maint Support Gp, Kisarazu Japan 11Sep54
To Army 08Oct54 (flyable inactive)

Thus it looks like it probably spent most of its time with the Army in Japan/Korea. Any L-20 experts out there?

(note: DHC2.com doesn’t have this data – just the ’12Jul54′ delivery date)

[QUOTE=Sabrejet;Great news: a USAF colour scheme maybe? :cool:[/QUOTE]

Well it wouldn’t be the first time. She was originally registered 53-3718 with the USAF!

A little bird tells me that this Beaver is on it’s way to the UK for restoration. No further details, but given the excellent job ARC did on cn 1442 (G-DHCZ), it seems likely she may be headed for Duxford.

Great news: a USAF colour scheme maybe? 😎