Proctuka in the air

Would have thought it would have been an N-reg under ‘experimental’.

TT[/QUOTE]

I believe the N reg “Experimental” cat has geographic limitations. In other words it can’t be flown outside of the USA. Occasionally, and usually as part of a plan to bring the aircraft to the local register, you can be issued an exemption but that needs to be agreed by both the FAA and the local authority (and in a practical sense the insurance company too).

Although not used in BoB movie one of the Proctukas did make an appearance in an episode of The Persuaders painted in a white and red colour scheme.

How very interesting! Was “the Persuaders” not made at Pinewood Studios where the “Battle of Britain” film was made? Interestingly, in a similar vein ,one of the Mosquito nose /cockpit sections used in “Mosquito Squadron” and “633 Squadron” appears repainted in silver in the 1968 Roger Moore movie “Crossplot”.

Colin

Maybe a moot point now, but how would it have been possible (then or now) to certify these very heavily modified “Proctucas” for flight? Please no CAA bashing here, I’m just curious.

Also for example, there was a Harvard at North Weald in the late 80’s that had been modified to represent a Zero for the film Tora Tora Tora in the USA, including a 3 bladed prop, rounded wing tips, and a single seat canopy glazing. Would this have retained its american “Experimental” certification while in the UK? This was also a modified from standard type.

The Proctor’s wings were removed, a new, cranked, centre section built and the original wings reattached at considerable dihedral. I think this alone tells you why they might not have been the most sturdy or pleasant contraptions to fly. Points for effort though! While the mods to the T6/Zero would have had an aerodynamic effect, there was nothing that mucked about with the structure in quite the same way! Last time I looked, the centre section was quite an iimportant component.

Although not used in BoB movie one of the Proctukas did make an appearance in an episode of The Persuaders painted in a white and red colour scheme.

Also for example, there was a Harvard at North Weald in the late 80’s that had been modified to represent a Zero for the film Tora Tora Tora in the USA, including a 3 bladed prop, rounded wing tips, and a single seat canopy glazing. Would this have retained its american “Experimental” certification while in the UK? This was also a modified from standard type.

Good question David,
I don’t know the answer, but the same aircraft went to New Zealand, were it operated for a number of years, then came to Australia, where it’s based with Flying Fighters at Brisbane in Queensland, and operates at shows here too.

The mods from a ‘standard’ T-6 are, aerodynamically, minor, but they are there. The Proctukas were a more major mod. I’d guess that a modified aircraft such as the Proctuka, intended only for use in a single film as a working ‘prop’, might be able to come under some exemptions in the original sense of a limited category of airworthyness. Again, I don’t know for certain.

Cheers

Yes DC I beleive so, depends also on the engine change – whether an S1H3G geared 1340 or an 1830 engine mod, to use 3 bladed prop.

Would have thought it would have been an N-reg under ‘experimental’.

TT

Maybe a moot point now, but how would it have been possible (then or now) to certify these very heavily modified “Proctucas” for flight? Please no CAA bashing here, I’m just curious.

Also for example, there was a Harvard at North Weald in the late 80’s that had been modified to represent a Zero for the film Tora Tora Tora in the USA, including a 3 bladed prop, rounded wing tips, and a single seat canopy glazing. Would this have retained its american “Experimental” certification while in the UK? This was also a modified from standard type.

To be fair, the Harvard-Zero was, more or less, cosmetic alteration. The Proctuka was a bit more… involved!

Certifying a “Proctuka” to fly

Maybe a moot point now, but how would it have been possible (then or now) to certify these very heavily modified “Proctucas” for flight? Please no CAA bashing here, I’m just curious.

Also for example, there was a Harvard at North Weald in the late 80’s that had been modified to represent a Zero for the film Tora Tora Tora in the USA, including a 3 bladed prop, rounded wing tips, and a single seat canopy glazing. Would this have retained its american “Experimental” certification while in the UK? This was also a modified from standard type.

A flying shot of a Proctuka reputedly taken during test flying by VB (though it was never used in the BoB film in the end). See 5th photo down on the following page:
http://www.wonwinglo.scale-models.net/id34.htm

A courageous try but doesn’t really do much for me. The photo caption says it all.

any of these proctuka’s left hanging arund?

Scrapped.

any of these proctuka’s left hanging arund?

This is a site created and maintained by Barry Clay.

Barry also set up/runs a very active local forum in Yahoo groups called Wings over Warwickshire.

Roger Smith.

I’m very familiar with Barry’s WoW site but didn’t realise this too was his – well done Barry obviously a labour of love.

Wow that Proctuka looks pretty good actually, how come they didn’t use them, because of the poor handling? Could swear I saw them described somewhere as Prentices used, looks like I was wrong though

As Mr Burke says, the handling left much to be desired, also the plane couldn’t have handled the steep dive pullouts that were required. Still, good pic, and it doesn’t look half bad from the front.

Rlangham – I think from memory that Viv thought the flying characteristics to be dreadful of the Proctuka .

This is a site created and maintained by Barry Clay.

Barry also set up/runs a very active local forum in Yahoo groups called Wings over Warwickshire.

Roger Smith.

They were definately Proctors – I photographed one of them at Bovingdon myself.

Wow that Proctuka looks pretty good actually, how come they didn’t use them, because of the poor handling? Could swear I saw them described somewhere as Prentices used, looks like I was wrong though