dark light

jimwomble

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 39 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • jimwomble
    Participant

    My dream for many years is buy a Piper Tomahawk (PA38-112) and fly to the annual Sentimental Journey Fly In at Lockhaven, PA. Hope to do this soon as I am not getting any younger. If you read Peck’s book on the Taylorcraft you will see how Piper took advantage of Taylor when he was seriously ill. But when the Piper plant at Bedford PA burned to the ground Piper wanted Taylor to help him rebuild. Taylor suffered from Polio and was always kind of frail. But he designed the Cub(E2) and the Taylorcraft.

    jimwomble
    Participant

    Have tried for years to get some recognition of Morehouse – tried to get a thread started on EAA’s vintage forum but no one was interested. Guess Morehouse is one of many unsung aviation pioneers who will be forgotten – especially since he was known as a engineer and not a pilot. Then again a rich businessman like William Piper gets all the praise – nothing against Piper – he spoke to a group of us freshman engineers at VA TECH in 1964. Use to have a book on Aeronca where Morehouse was very prominent. Guess we stand on tall shoulder of the true aviation pioneers.

    jimwomble
    Participant

    Chitts thanks for the correction – wonder if you even heard of Morehouse before I brought him up in the discussion.

    jimwomble
    Participant

    According to Mr. Google he lived from 1894 to 1973. His lack of recognition may be the reason why he wrote a manuscript about other early aviation pioneers meant for publication but never was. Do a Google on his name as early aviation pioneer and you may be amazed at his accomplishments.

    jimwomble
    Participant

    As far as Bell is concerned I should have said airplanes not aircraft. Think the YP59 was their last airplane except for experimental work. Someone should write a readable book on what happened to Curtis – know I would buy a copy. Any more thoughts on Curtis that members would like to share?

    jimwomble
    Participant

    Seem like the most overbuilt US airplanes of the war were the P40, P39, and yes the P47. More were built than could be used by US and they were all built in NY. Probably for various reasons instead of just politics like I originally thought. Only Republic continued aircraft production after the war as maybe Bell and Curtiss had established a bad reputation by end of 1945.

    jimwomble
    Participant

    Just going by his own estimation at the times.

    jimwomble
    Participant

    I am a student of US history and think FDR was only second to Lincoln as president. But of course the times make the leader – Churchill was a failure until Hitler made him a great leader. I know the Truman commission shut down the Vultee attack aircraft line – no one wanted them. And they came close to shutting down the Martin B26 line – one a day in Tampa Bay. If the P47 was so great why is it the new U S Air force couldn’t wait to get rid of them as well as the B24, B26, P40, and P39. Where as the P51, AT6’s, F4U, PBY, B25, and even the B17 linger on for another 10 years or so. Maybe should had used East Coast instead of NY. As for the Solid South Roosevelt was tired of dealing with the Southern intransigency and had serious discussions with Willkie (yes the man he defeated in1940) about forming a new party excluding the South and the farm belt states. But Willkie died after a minor operation and Roosevelt became to frail.

    in reply to: General Discussion #233296
    jimwomble
    Participant

    Over here across the pond they are calling May another Hillary Clinton – in other words a born looser.

    in reply to: 50 and still going strong #824235
    jimwomble
    Participant

    I know that Piper was loosing out to Cessna in the low cost 4 seater market in the late 50’s so they commissioned Fred Weick (father of the Ercoupe) and Jim Thorp(home-built designer) to design a low cost, easy to build all metal replacement for the antiquated, fabric covered Tri_Pacer. It was built in a new plant in Florida to escape union labor cost. Actually easier to fly than a Cessna 172(especially in high winds) they are still built today as the Archer. Next year if the creek does not rise plan on buying a PA28-140 of the 60’s vintage which can be bought in the states for about $20,000.

    in reply to: Why is a Hurricane so costly to restore. #835125
    jimwomble
    Participant

    Is this very complex construction typical of Hawker aircraft of the thirties? How about the Gladiator – as difficult to restore? How about all thirties UK warbirds also as difficult to restore?

    in reply to: Spitfire P9374 heading stateside! #837816
    jimwomble
    Participant

    I don’t understand why it now takes about twice as many hours and probably money to restore a Hurricane to service as it does a Spitfire. During the war was not one of the pluses for a Hurricane was the less time to build or repair compared to the Spitfire?

    in reply to: Cessna 172 history how long in the air? #378165
    jimwomble
    Participant

    About 1973 Cessna added a cuff to the leading edge of the wing making a already docile airplane even more so and very difficult to spin. This was done after STC modifications were being sold to modify the wing in the same way. The Cessna 172 has the best fatal safety record of any GA airplane followed by the 150 and then 182. High wing single engine Cessna airplanes with struts have a very good safety record.

    in reply to: Cessna 172 history how long in the air? #378174
    jimwomble
    Participant

    From what I remember the 172 was introduced in 1956 to compete with the Piper Tri-Pacer that came out in 1951 of course with a nose wheel. The 172 outsold the 170 by such a margin that by the middle of 1956 they stopped making the 170. In today’s used airplane market(USA) the Cessna 170 sell for a higher price than an early 172(56-58). In 1966 you could buy a new 172 for about $16,000. Today’s 172 goes for almost 400,000. No wonder new GA aircraft sales are only a shadow of what they were before 1980.

    in reply to: General Discussion #243136
    jimwomble
    Participant

    Guess the thing to do is subscribe to the magazine at a savings of $40 per year.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 39 total)