Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 3, 2005, 11:03 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

I was playing with my Fz5 and took a shot of this plane at full 12x zoom, about 1000 feet up and directly overhead. I didn't realize the unusual prop configuration until I looked at it the next day on my computer. What is it?
Attached Images
 
trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 3, 2005, 11:18 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
CCWKen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 221
Default

Just a push-pull configuration. I don't know your plane model but the idea has been around since the late 1800's. (Yes, pre-Wright Brothers) By the looks of the tank on the bottom, it may be used for fire fighting. The duel engine/prop gives it more power for heavier payloads.
CCWKen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 12:44 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

I know it's a Cessna, but I can't remember the model, it's been about 30 years since I've seen one.
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 12:46 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

That is a Cessna Skymaster. The military used it in Vietnam as a forward air control craft with the designation O-2A.

It is a pretty good performer in civilian garb, but the military overloaded it (of course). If the forward engine failed on takeoff it might barely fly. If the aft engine failed it usually went in. It is surprising to me that the rear prop configuration is more efficient. The fore and aft engines were the same power.

The advantage of the plane was that you didn't need a multi-engine rating to fly it because the thrust was all from the center.


slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 1:04 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

You guys are a fountain of information, thanks! I'd never seen one before.
trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 1:14 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

slipe wrote:
Quote:
That is a Cessna Skymaster. The military used it in Vietnam as a forward air control craft with the designation O-2A.

It is a pretty good performer in civilian garb, but the military overloaded it (of course). If the forward engine failed on takeoff it might barely fly. If the aft engine failed it usually went in. It is surprising to me that the rear prop configuration is more efficient. The fore and aft engines were the same power.

The advantage of the plane was that you didn't need a multi-engine rating to fly it because the thrust was all from the center.

Thanks, I almost said Skymaster but wasn't sure. Talking about the efficiency of a pusher prop...I almost built this one years ago. Now I'm too old andtoo lazy to build the "Cozy":G:G:GSailing is more my speed

Hiroshi
Attached Images
 
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 1:15 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

Sorry, double post

Hiroshi
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 2:16 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

Quote:
I almost built this one years ago
When ultralights started out everyone "rediscovered" the canard. The canard produces lift where the tail on a standard configuration pulls down, producing drag that isn't beneficial and causing the wing to have to produce more lift and drag to compensate. The canard can be adjusted so it stalls before the main wing, so the plane will just slush and never stall the wing. Magic!

Almost all of the fatalities from untralights were from the canards. There are hardly any left that I know of. The standard configuration planes were very safe. There is a reason the Wright Brothers flew first in a canard and they have only appeared on the fringe of aviation. A small canard assist on a fighter or Concorde is OK. But I would never own a canard airplane. Bend them around a bit and you get in trouble real fast. And I wouldn't own a plane I couldn't bend around.

slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 3:22 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

The Cozy is the side by side version of the LongEZ designed by Burt Rutan whom I consider a genius of aviation. Thepic belowis of The Beechcraft Starship a canard biz-turboprop designed by Burt who also designed Voyager (the first and only plane to fly around the world without refueling), He also designed Space Ship One, the first successful privately funded space craft (that's the strange looking thingunderneath the Starship in the top pic) just to name a few of his extraordinary designs.
Attached Images
 
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 3:43 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Hiroshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,749
Default

FOR THOSE OF YOU INTERESTED IN AVIATION...HERE'S A PIC OF SPACE SHIP ONE
Attached Images
 
Hiroshi is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:48 PM.