For Aircraft enthusiasts: the many attempts of trying to replace the DC-3

[Blazer]

It's funny how it goes, when Donald Douglas was asked by American Airlines and KLM, the Royal Dutch Airline for an enlarged version of his already successful DC-2 he really didn't think that there would be a market for a plane like that.

Of course as we all know now, there not only was a market for that plane but it would remain in the air for 76 years and counting since that first flight in 1935 becoming by far the most successful aircraft ever, being used in roles it was never intended for.

But even after the first years of production, people were already looking ahead at what could eventually replace the Dependable Douglas aircraft.

KLM, the royal Dutch Airline had been so far Douglas' most faithful customer where the DC-2 and DC-3 had replaced their fleet of Fokker trimotor planes.

The Fokker F-18, the furthest development of the Fokker F-7 Trimotor, it had a fuselage of steel tubing spanned with linen and a wooden wing.
The KLM, being an airline with subdivisions in both the east and west indies was a company where the management listened to what their pilots had to say and one of the key criticisms they had was of the Douglas planes' noses being too high off the ground and that the old Fokkers were easier to load because of the wing being in the plane's spine, rather than it's belly. So the KLM issued an order to both Douglas and Fokker to design a shoulder decker version of the DC-3, which would have nose closer to the ground and the wing configuration of the old Fokkers, making it easier to load and unload.

Not that surprising, the resulting planes resembled each other.

The DC-5

However with War breaking out and only 12 DC-5's built and delivered, Douglas was being put into manufacturing C-47's (the military version of the DC-3) and no further DC-5's were built. The Fokker F-24 was never built at all but it would later resurface after the war. (More about that later) But the few DC-5's that were built performed beautifully, proving it to be a superior plane to the DC-3.

With war now a certainty there emerged a demand for a larger transport plane than the C-47 but still small enough so it could operate from war condition airfields. Curtiss-Wright responded with the C-46 Commando.

The C-46 on paper was just what was needed, it was bigger than the C-47 and not quite as big as the Boeing C-75 Stratoliner. (A transport version of their B-17 Bomber) But issues with pressurization of the cockpit and cabin and host of other problems that couldn't be resolved in time gave it a reputation of a dog. Eventually being nicknamed the "Curtiss Calamity" by its crews. To its credit, there are still C-46 flying, mostly in remote eras where their rather primitive but rugged construction turned out to be their greatest asset.

After the war ended, many surplus DC-3 and C-47 ended up on the civilian market but those battered battle weary warriors didn't really inspire confidence from the airlines. So several companies set out to design a replacement. They all had the same mindset: it had to be a twin engine low decker plane like the DC-3 but with more advanced pressurization systems, more powerful engines and a tricicle landing gear. Again the resulting planes all resembled each other.

The Convair 240.

The Martin 202

The Ilyushin IL-14 "Crate"

The Saab Scandia.

But even though those planes performed well, those old surplus DC-3's they were intended to replace, just kept on going and with Jet technology making way, they never would have such distinguished careers, and apart from the Convair and its deratives of which there are still some flying, faded into obscurity.

As I said before, Jet technology came at the forefront after the war and along with it came the turboprop engine, which made it possible for propeller driven planes to be more economic. In the Netherlands Fokker saw an opportunity to take this then-brand new technology and run with it. They took their F-24 design and updated it to incorporate laminated metal construction (Imagine plywood but with Aluminium instead or Birch) laminar flow wings and Turboprop engines. The result was the F-27 Friendship

A Fokker F-27M Troopship of the Finish Air Force.
The F-27 and it's military variant, the F-27M Troopship have proved themselves to be dependable workhorses, replacing aging DC-3's with airlines and air forces all over the world. Fairchild Republic acquired the licencing rights and built 200 examples in the USA. And the later F-50 is still flying today.

Even today there's still a market for a twin engine propliner to fulfill the duties that the DC-3 fulfilled but in most cases though, the old workhorse is still performing those duties. And proving Donald Douglas, who doubted the marketing potential of the DC-3, wrong with each time one takes off.

[stratovani]

Excellent post, Blazer! Just goes to show that Donald Douglas got it right the first time with the DC-3.

[bassteban]

It is/was the P-Bass of commercial aviation.

[fhm555]

In the early 70's when my dad was in the process of obtaining his multi engine commercial license, he accumulated the required hours on an old DC-3 based at the local civilian airfield. It was a passenger plane leased out by local groups wanting to go to the indy 500, vegas etc.

I would go with him any time I could and had free run of the aircraft so long as I didn't make a nuisance of myself in the cockpit.

[Michael Jewels]

OH, BOY! OH, BOY! OH, BOY!

Another airplane thread!

Excuse me; I can get carried away when discussing airplanes.

Very good post Blazer.

If I remember correctly, the C-46 was the largest twin engine plane in the US inventory during World War 2. You can see the wings are just begging for two more engines in the fifth photo you posted.

Now, let's start our DC-3.
How to start a DC-3 - YouTube

Mike

[bassteban]

Originally Posted by Michael Jewels

If I remember correctly, the C-46 was the largest twin engine plane in the US inventory during World War 2..

I had not heard that, but after reading the statement, I looked at wiki entries on the C-46 & Catalina, guessing that the Cat would've at least had a greater wingspan- nope: PBY- 104", Commando- 108'. A big dog indeed.
Also, yay airplanes!

[Blazer]

Originally Posted by bassteban

I had not heard that, but after reading the statement, I looked at wiki entries on the C-46 & Catalina, guessing that the Cat would've at least had a greater wingspan- nope: PBY- 104", Commando- 108'. A big dog indeed.
Also, yay airplanes!

Ever heard of the Messerschmitt Gigant? That one was developed as a giant transport glider, towed by two Heinkel Bombers.


But after a while they figured that it would be far easier to give that plane engines so it could fly on it's own.


But the Gigant was so massive that four engines wasn't enough.


And even with six BMW radials those wings looked empty.

[bmc]

I think a lot of people think that the replacedment for the DC-3 is going to be another 26 seat taildragger that can fly in another of short strips and carry a load.

The virtues of the Douglas racer were it's dependability, felexibility and the role it played in opening up so many passenger and cargo markets for airlines and charter companies, aside for the role it played in three major conflicts (WW2, Korea, Vietnam).

To me, two airplanes have played similar wide ranging roles, yet are very different from each other. The first is the DHC-6 Twin Otter and the other is the B737. The Twotter is close to 50 years old and is now in production again. Wheels, skiis, floats, amphibs, offstrip, STOL. Nineteen seats with quick conversion to all cargo config. Simple fixed gear. It's a big Cessna.

The B737 was a real improvement on the small bodied DC-9-10 and-30. They sold a couple of thousand of them. You can operate them off of gravel, ice, pavement. You only need 5,000 feet of runway, which opens up lots of possibilities. And, in keeping with the Dak's role of opening up the world, the B737 certainly has done that.

I remember doing a test flight in DC-3, C-FLFR, out of Resolute Bay in the high arctic. This was before Buffalo bought it from Bradley Air Services. The plane had just had an engine change and I went up with the crew and the engineer. Once airborne, we leved off at 30 feet above the ice. It was a lovely spring evening. Every time we wanted to turn, we had to climb so we didn't cartwheel the airplane. I took a bunch of flights in LFR into gravel strips and out on the ice. My first flight in 3 was out of Pembrook, Ontario back in the 70's. Pemair operated the oldest operational DC-3. It had the door on the opposite side of the fuselage. I used to fly to Montreal on weekends.

Great machine.

[bmc]

Here is C-FLFR when Bradley's operated it.

[bmc]

Originally Posted by Michael Jewels

OH, BOY! OH, BOY! OH, BOY!

Another airplane thread!

Excuse me; I can get carried away when discussing airplanes.

Mike

Hi Mike....scuttlebutt on the ramp, when I was up north, was that the C-46 fusealge was so much bigger that the C-47 that could you fit the DC-3 inside a C-46.

Oh, and in case anyone ever asks, there are two million rivets in a DC-3.

Brian

[bassteban]

@Blazer- yup, am familiar w/the Gigant, both powered & unpowered. I remember seeing a picture of a C-5 Galaxy w/it's engines removed for an overhaul, and the caption alluded to a possible modern transport glider...

googled a bit, but no find.

[Michael Jewels]

Originally Posted by bmc

I think a lot of people think that the replacedment for the DC-3 is going to be another 26 seat taildragger that can fly in another of short strips and carry a load.

The virtues of the Douglas racer were it's dependability, felexibility and the role it played in opening up so many passenger and cargo markets for airlines and charter companies, aside for the role it played in three major conflicts (WW2, Korea, Vietnam).

To me, two airplanes have played similar wide ranging roles, yet are very different from each other. The first is the DHC-6 Twin Otter and the other is the B737. The Twotter is close to 50 years old and is now in production again. Wheels, skiis, floats, amphibs, offstrip, STOL. Nineteen seats with quick conversion to all cargo config. Simple fixed gear. It's a big Cessna.

The B737 was a real improvement on the small bodied DC-9-10 and-30. They sold a couple of thousand of them. You can operate them off of gravel, ice, pavement. You only need 5,000 feet of runway, which opens up lots of possibilities. And, in keeping with the Dak's role of opening up the world, the B737 certainly has done that.

I remember doing a test flight in DC-3, C-FLFR, out of Resolute Bay in the high arctic. This was before Buffalo bought it from Bradley Air Services. The plane had just had an engine change and I went up with the crew and the engineer. Once airborne, we leved off at 30 feet above the ice. It was a lovely spring evening. Every time we wanted to turn, we had to climb so we didn't cartwheel the airplane. I took a bunch of flights in LFR into gravel strips and out on the ice. My first flight in 3 was out of Pembrook, Ontario back in the 70's. Pemair operated the oldest operational DC-3. It had the door on the opposite side of the fuselage. I used to fly to Montreal on weekends.

Great machine.

Very nice post, Brian.

I, too, am a fan of the DeHavilland Twin Otter.

Check out this video of a Twotter on floats. It looks like the pilot hits the throttles at .05 seconds, and gets unstuck at .13! He must have had a pretty good headwind.
twin otter windy take off - YouTube

Here's a video of two Cessna Caravan floatplanes, one with an uprated engine from Texas Turbines.
900 shp Texas Turbines Supervan 900 vs. Stock 675 shp Caravan in Takeoffs on floats.avi - YouTube

And here's a video of the ten most dangerous airports.
#10 Most Extreme Airports [HD] - YouTube

Brian, I think you might have sent me the last two videos earlier.

Enjoy, everyone.

Mike

[bmc]

That Twotter is a Kenn Borek machine, despite being part of Maldivian Air taxi. Kenn Borek was involved in the start up, with a bunch of their machines. Lots of Canadian pilots flying.

The Twotter on floats is interesting in that it has no water rudders. Directional control is with differential throttles. Quite the STOL machine. Check out this short landing in strong winds:

Twin Otter STOL Landing in high winds - YouTube