By: Erlindur
- 10th June 2010 at 09:04Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The nose whel retracts backwards and the main wheels retract forwards as you can see in the Airliners.net pictures.
My only objection to King Air C90, is that the wreck main wheels seem to retract backwards. Just look at the wheel base next to the diver in the first 2 photos in the thread. There may be something broken and it just looks that way or maybe not. Seawreck, you've been there. Do the main wheels retract forwards or backwards?
Disclaimer: I know nothing about civil aircraft. I just look and compare photos.
By: Seawreck
- 10th June 2010 at 09:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My only objection to King Air C90, is that the wreck main wheels seem to retract backwards. Just look at the wheel base next to the diver in the first 2 photos in the thread. There may be something broken and it just looks that way or maybe not. Seawreck, you've been there. Do the main wheels retract forwards or backwards?
Disclaimer: I know nothing about civil aircraft. I just look and compare photos.
Forwards....
I know its a bit confusing since one wheel seems to retract back and the other is standing like a forward. The one which is standing is just because some fishing nets were caught.
If you look carefully at the engine you will see that the engine has a rounded shape in order to allow the wheel to fit.
By: Erlindur
- 10th June 2010 at 09:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Forwards....
I know its a bit confusing since one wheel seems to retract back and the other is standing like a forward. The one which is standing is just because some fishing nets were caught.
If you look carefully at the engine you will see that the engine has a rounded shape in order to allow the wheel to fit.
I was wrong then. Thnx for the clarification.
Thnx for the quick answer as well. Figuring out where is the mass centre of a plane with a nose wheel and main wheels positioned like the confusing one, could ruin the best part of my day :)
By: Bmused55
- 10th June 2010 at 10:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
After seing that gallery, I'm staying with my King Air identification.
It looks like the plane is either half buried in the soft silt or has compacted down, thus obscuring the upper fuselage from view.
The most identifiable and unique feature are the angles of the leading edge inboard and outboard of the engine nacelles. I have only seen this design on the King Air and it's various models.
Ok, Distiller posted while I was typing: T-44 = Military/Maritime version of the King Air
By: ThreeSpool
- 10th June 2010 at 10:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I am with Bmused on this one. Undoubtably a 90 Series King Air. There does appear to be a portion missing from the end of the wing, plus the aileron is missing too.
It is worth mentioning too that a lot of King Airs are modified (such as Raisbeck) to include various items such as gear doors, four-blade props, etc.
By: Seawreck
- 10th June 2010 at 11:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think we are on the right track....
Is it possible to find a photo of a T-44 showing the belly of the aircraft?
I do have one more query for you guys.......The edge of the T-44 wing is squared....the edge of the wreck looks rounded. Are there any variations of the T-44 with rounded wings?
doesn't show up any specific references to King Airs but there is a military accident on 25 August 2003 where the type is not specified. However, I have to say that if was a military airframe I would have expected them to have removed the airframe for investigation.
Now, a civil airframe perhaps on some kind of nefarious activity might just be allowed to lie where it went down.
doesn't show up any specific references to King Airs but there is a military accident on 25 August 2003 where the type is not specified. However, I have to say that if was a military airframe I would have expected them to have removed the airframe for investigation.
Now, a civil airframe perhaps on some kind of nefarious activity might just be allowed to lie where it went down.
Lesbos....is far away from the Saronic gulf where the wreck is located.
Its sure that its a military version since we found many printed instructions on the fuselage....
By: Bmused55
- 10th June 2010 at 12:41Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think we are on the right track....
Is it possible to find a photo of a T-44 showing the belly of the aircraft?
I do have one more query for you guys.......The edge of the T-44 wing is squared....the edge of the wreck looks rounded. Are there any variations of the T-44 with rounded wings?
By edge, do you mean the wing tip? (IE the very end, tip).
I think, however, we are dealing with a civil version of the King Air C90.
The instructions you have pictured would most likely appear on military and civil versions, I cannot read all of the text but it is a Caution notice. Possibly to do with the hot oil and plumbing in the engine nacelle?
As has been mentioned, a military version will have been recovered for investigation, especialy from such an accessible depth.
My bet is on a drug runner ditching due to difficulties, pilot error (flying too low) or forced down by coast guard.
I think, however, we are dealing with a civil version of the King Air C90.
The instructions you have pictured would most likely appear on military and civil versions, I cannot read all of the text but it is a Caution notice. Possibly to do with the hot oil and plumbing in the engine nacelle?
As has been mentioned, a military version will have been recovered for investigation, especialy from such an accessible depth.
My bet is on a drug runner ditching due to difficulties, pilot error (flying too low) or forced down by coast guard.
Wow !!
Drug runners etc !! you make its more exciting now !!
Ok lets see now a few things.....Dont be so sure that all military aircrafts are recovered for investigation....its a practice....but there are always expemtions. During the dive I noticed that the aircraft has no paint. It has this alu military cover which you meet mostly on aircrafts of 60s and 70s
Also....next to caution there is the word PLUMBING....therefore I think you are correct.
As far as concerns the wing edge (wing tip) you are correct again...
I think, however, we are dealing with a civil version of the King Air C90.
The instructions you have pictured would most likely appear on military and civil versions, I cannot read all of the text but it is a Caution notice. Possibly to do with the hot oil and plumbing in the engine nacelle?
As has been mentioned, a military version will have been recovered for investigation, especialy from such an accessible depth.
My bet is on a drug runner ditching due to difficulties, pilot error (flying too low) or forced down by coast guard.
Wow !!
Drug runners etc !! you make it more exciting now !!
Ok lets see now a few things.....Dont be so sure that all military aircrafts are recovered for investigation....its a practice....but there are always expemtions. During the dive I noticed that the aircraft has no paint. It has this alu military cover which you meet mostly on aircrafts of 60s and 70s
Also....next to caution there is the word PLUMBING....therefore I think you are correct.
As far as concerns the wing edge (wing tip) you are correct again...
BTW did you see the pic of the rear wings? if yes do they belong to a T tail?
All the other photos I have seen show the 99 to have twin wheel main gear (the ones that tuck into the engine nacelle).
This wreck as a single wheel type for its main gear.
Also, notice the more elongated nose which in the drawing extends much further forward than the one in the wreck.
I will do some photoshopping tonight to see if I can show my main points.
Of course, once we get more photos, we can get a far better idea.
If possible, have someone sit beside the wreck while the photographer floats above it as close to the centerline as possible.
This will give us a more accurate idea of wing shape and scale.
Any close ups of writing, plaques or unique fuselage features will help too.
By: Seawreck
- 10th June 2010 at 13:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Of course, once we get more photos, we can get a far better idea.
If possible, have someone sit beside the wreck while someone else floats above it as close to the centerline as possible.
This will give us a more accurate idea of wing shape and scale.
Any close ups of writing, plaques or unique fuselage features will help too.
This Saturday...we have organised a re shooting of the wreck....
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 07:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Me too.
Please click on the following link in order to see more photos of the wreck
http://www.sea-wrecks.gr/gallery/index.php?fID=18
Also, if you hit the following link you will see the rear wings of the aircraft which are familiar with a Beech 99 and not King....
http://www.sea-wrecks.gr/gallery/index.php?iID=514
I really look forward for your comments.
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 08:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Few more things that make this investigation a hard puzzle....
The width of the fuselage leads to a twin seated cockpit but not a side to side configuration. We found that the aircraft had a stick and two seats.
The edge of the wing is rounded and not squared as it appears in most (or all) Beechcraft blueprints.
http://www.sea-wrecks.gr/gallery/index.php?iID=516
Cmon lads......HELP !!!
Posts: 117
By: Erlindur - 10th June 2010 at 09:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My only objection to King Air C90, is that the wreck main wheels seem to retract backwards. Just look at the wheel base next to the diver in the first 2 photos in the thread. There may be something broken and it just looks that way or maybe not. Seawreck, you've been there. Do the main wheels retract forwards or backwards?
Disclaimer: I know nothing about civil aircraft. I just look and compare photos.
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 09:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Forwards....
I know its a bit confusing since one wheel seems to retract back and the other is standing like a forward. The one which is standing is just because some fishing nets were caught.
If you look carefully at the engine you will see that the engine has a rounded shape in order to allow the wheel to fit.
Posts: 117
By: Erlindur - 10th June 2010 at 09:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I was wrong then. Thnx for the clarification.
Thnx for the quick answer as well. Figuring out where is the mass centre of a plane with a nose wheel and main wheels positioned like the confusing one, could ruin the best part of my day :)
Posts: 4,674
By: Distiller - 10th June 2010 at 10:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's a T-44. The Greeks flew it some time in the past. Should be in a database of armed forces mishaps.
Posts: 10,625
By: Bmused55 - 10th June 2010 at 10:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
After seing that gallery, I'm staying with my King Air identification.
It looks like the plane is either half buried in the soft silt or has compacted down, thus obscuring the upper fuselage from view.
The most identifiable and unique feature are the angles of the leading edge inboard and outboard of the engine nacelles. I have only seen this design on the King Air and it's various models.
Ok, Distiller posted while I was typing: T-44 = Military/Maritime version of the King Air
Photos: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/t-44-pics.htm
Posts: 949
By: ThreeSpool - 10th June 2010 at 10:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I am with Bmused on this one. Undoubtably a 90 Series King Air. There does appear to be a portion missing from the end of the wing, plus the aileron is missing too.
It is worth mentioning too that a lot of King Airs are modified (such as Raisbeck) to include various items such as gear doors, four-blade props, etc.
Posts: 1,497
By: zoot horn rollo - 10th June 2010 at 10:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I have to say that I didn't think the picture of the Kingair from below posted above was a King Air either precisely for that reason.
Posts: 1,497
By: zoot horn rollo - 10th June 2010 at 10:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From a random web site
The King Air B200C equipped with cameras, cargo doors and special mission systems, is in service with the armed forces of Greece.
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 11:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think we are on the right track....
Is it possible to find a photo of a T-44 showing the belly of the aircraft?
I do have one more query for you guys.......The edge of the T-44 wing is squared....the edge of the wreck looks rounded. Are there any variations of the T-44 with rounded wings?
Posts: 1,497
By: zoot horn rollo - 10th June 2010 at 11:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://www.baaa-acro.com/Pays/G/Grece.htm
doesn't show up any specific references to King Airs but there is a military accident on 25 August 2003 where the type is not specified. However, I have to say that if was a military airframe I would have expected them to have removed the airframe for investigation.
Now, a civil airframe perhaps on some kind of nefarious activity might just be allowed to lie where it went down.
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 11:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The wreck has not a "T" tail.
http://www.sea-wrecks.gr/gallery/index.php?iID=514
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 11:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lesbos....is far away from the Saronic gulf where the wreck is located.
Its sure that its a military version since we found many printed instructions on the fuselage....
Posts: 10,625
By: Bmused55 - 10th June 2010 at 12:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
By edge, do you mean the wing tip? (IE the very end, tip).
Here is the only photo I can find of a T44 from below:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3298/3537509057_e358ce549b.jpg
I think, however, we are dealing with a civil version of the King Air C90.
The instructions you have pictured would most likely appear on military and civil versions, I cannot read all of the text but it is a Caution notice. Possibly to do with the hot oil and plumbing in the engine nacelle?
As has been mentioned, a military version will have been recovered for investigation, especialy from such an accessible depth.
My bet is on a drug runner ditching due to difficulties, pilot error (flying too low) or forced down by coast guard.
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 12:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Wow !!
Drug runners etc !! you make its more exciting now !!
Ok lets see now a few things.....Dont be so sure that all military aircrafts are recovered for investigation....its a practice....but there are always expemtions. During the dive I noticed that the aircraft has no paint. It has this alu military cover which you meet mostly on aircrafts of 60s and 70s
Also....next to caution there is the word PLUMBING....therefore I think you are correct.
As far as concerns the wing edge (wing tip) you are correct again...
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 12:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Wow !!
Drug runners etc !! you make it more exciting now !!
Ok lets see now a few things.....Dont be so sure that all military aircrafts are recovered for investigation....its a practice....but there are always expemtions. During the dive I noticed that the aircraft has no paint. It has this alu military cover which you meet mostly on aircrafts of 60s and 70s
Also....next to caution there is the word PLUMBING....therefore I think you are correct.
As far as concerns the wing edge (wing tip) you are correct again...
BTW did you see the pic of the rear wings? if yes do they belong to a T tail?
Posts: 10,625
By: Bmused55 - 10th June 2010 at 13:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here is a Beech 99
http://richard.ferriere.free.fr/3vues/beech99_3v.jpg
All the other photos I have seen show the 99 to have twin wheel main gear (the ones that tuck into the engine nacelle).
This wreck as a single wheel type for its main gear.
Also, notice the more elongated nose which in the drawing extends much further forward than the one in the wreck.
Here is a king air drawing:
http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot-restricted/modernplanes/modern-jk/king_air-02289.jpg
Note that the position the main gear sits at when stowed is precisely as pictured on the wreck.
I will do some photoshopping tonight to see if I can show my main points.
Of course, once we get more photos, we can get a far better idea.
If possible, have someone sit beside the wreck while the photographer floats above it as close to the centerline as possible.
This will give us a more accurate idea of wing shape and scale.
Any close ups of writing, plaques or unique fuselage features will help too.
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 13:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One more photo in order to make it more complex.
This photo shows a glass window on the belly of the aircraft. Is it common to have glass areas on a civil aircraft?
Posts: 38
By: Seawreck - 10th June 2010 at 13:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This Saturday...we have organised a re shooting of the wreck....