Fun fact: The Wildcat pioneered the wingfold mechanism Grumman would use on many subsequent aircraft, from the Hellcat all the way up to the E-2/C-2.
And it was the last in the line to use the original retractable gear system that the FF biplane used.Fun fact: The Wildcat pioneered the wingfold mechanism Grumman would use on many subsequent aircraft, from the Hellcat all the way up to the E-2/C-2.
I actually geeked out on Google after posting that (hey, PacNW, stuck in my house, why not). Looks like it was the F4F, F6F, E-1/W2F, and E-2 that I can find. Strangely the S2F and C1F/TF-1 folded the wings S-3 style over the top, but they must have had to change it for the Fudd due to the dome.(I didn't realize that about the wing fold- that's pretty neat!)
I thought I read somewhere that the T-34 was originally designed as a Beech Bonanza fuselage with a tandem cockpit and non-weird tail. Then, they got the T-34C and decided to replace the wing with the wing from a Beech Baron because it had power more equivalent to a civilian light twin.Speaking of retractable gear systems, the system on the T-34 is basically the same system from the 1947 Bonanza (the V tail, for anyone who is fuzzy on general aviation airplanes) and almost every small piston engined Beechcraft from 1947 through present day*
The Japanese created a fat Mentor, the Fuji LM-1. I have flown one that used to be down in Fredericksburg VA. Funky...That pretty much sums it up. The internal company code for the T-34 is model A45. The Bonanza is the 35 (and other letter- number combinations with a 35) and later 33 and 36. The model numbers aren't sequential though, they're a little random.
The T-34 tail was used only on the T-34 and the first two production years of the model 95. I think that tail is iconic but I'm biased- I own a 1959 95.
I haven’t flown any but the C, but a quick glance shows more than double the horsepower, extra 8k ceiling, extra 100kts VneI have flown the T34A ( with the boat anchor O-470 ), and the 34B with a peppy -520 on it. Having never flown the 34C, does the PT6 make a big difference in performance? Any of y'all out there flown all three?
The 34A with a 470 is gutless. Fun to fly, but gutless. The 34B with 520 or 550 on it seems to make up for it. Plenty of power....
And in the same vein, the engine condition acuators on the CH-46 fuel control unit were repurposed fuel jettison valve acuators from the Boeing B-29 Super Fortress.Dont forget the TBF/TBM. And, for all you E-2 "tube dwellers" the vent handle on the floor in the E2, same handle on the Hydraulic selector valve on the TBM. Figure Grumman had a million of of those things left over.......
Yes & no. Yes, with the same power changes, trim is needed. The full throw of the throttle on the B of course equates to less power change than on the C, so in that sense, no, not as much trim is needed. Overall I would say the B doesn't feel as demanding with the trim.Does the B also need to be re-trimmed in all three axes if you look at it cross-eyed?