ex-USAF Vietnam Cessna O-2A Skymaster en route to Holland now, to be based at Teuge..

By: Stony - 31st May 2013 at 13:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

That's a very nice looking aircraft!!
Looking forward to see her upclose.

By: J Boyle - 31st May 2013 at 15:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Great warbird...semi-affordable and practical as well.

By: TonyT - 31st May 2013 at 18:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Ahhhhh a rear engine fire in waiting, :) thought the military ones had knee high windows on the side below the screen

By: David Burke - 31st May 2013 at 19:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

The clear door is on the right hand side.

By: TonyT - 31st May 2013 at 20:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Gotcha, there is also a clear section forward of it too... They are damn pain in the **** to work on, over complex gear that had a habit of doing its own thing and a rear engine that could burst into flames at the drop of a hat and you could be sitting there dumb and happy unaware, hence the mirrors under the wing so you can keep an eye in both.

By: Bager1968 - 1st June 2013 at 08:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Which is why most civilian Skymasters had the rear engine disabled... or at least not run unless the front one quit.

It was not removed due to C/G issues.

By: scrooge - 1st June 2013 at 11:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Which is why most civilian Skymasters had the rear engine disabled... or at least not run unless the front one quit.

It was not removed due to C/G issues.

So pilots took off in a twin engine aircraft with one engine deliberately shut down just in case it caught fire?

Despite the fact that the rear engine was more efficent due to aerodynamic flow and gave better book figures in an engine out situation?

Biggest risk was inadvertant loss of the rear engine during taxi followed by a single engine take-off (or attempt anyway), corrective technique was to ensure take-off roll was started by advancement of the rear engine first to confirm of operation.

By: TonyT - 1st June 2013 at 13:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Never knew of one flying on one on purpose, the 337 was brought out to get around the problems of asymmetric thrust, which it did, though the rear engine tended to suffer from cooling issues on the ground at least.. coupled with the lack of a fire indication system, but you could see the engine in the mirror fitted outboard on the wings, they were there also to see the gears state of affairs if it had a problem as you couldn't see it from the cockpit.

I must admit is was one of my favourite looking aircraft, one took out a jet fighter in the Far East when attacked, he fired off the rockets used to hit / mark ground targets and hit it.

By: J Boyle - 1st June 2013 at 14:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Which is why most civilian Skymasters had the rear engine disabled.

Simply not true. I really don't know where you got that idea from.
Like most GA light twins, it would have had a difficult time taking off with any kind of load on one engine.
Besides, I'm sure the FAA would have a dim view of the practice, requiring fixes to be made to the engine or grounding of the type if for some unlikely reason the problem couldn't be fixed.

Also, I've never heard of the engine fires that TonyT speaks of.

Also, TonyT...you're half correct.
There was a another window forward of the door post on military O-2s...but it was only on the right side (along with the extra windows in the bottom of the doors).
So the example illustrated may have them. Why have the extra windows only on the right? Presumably, the pilot could look down on his side, but not in a right turn.

Scrooge has it right in his comment about the rear engine stalling during taxi and some pilots not noticing. Cessna told pilots to advance the rear engine first and pilots retrofitted the rear view mirrors.

Perhaps poster StephWilk, a former editor of Flying magazine could give us his opinion? He must know the type...and its associated stories.

For those interested, I can recommend a series of books on the development (warts and all) of Cessna aircraft by a former Cessna engineer. It cuts through all the "hangar stories" and uneducated small talk.

By: Gerard - 2nd June 2013 at 13:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

some visual information about the windows on the right-hand side of the plane. (BTW: this is a ex-USAF O-2A flown by Aussie pilots in Vietnam. Now owned by the Temora Aviation Museum. )

By: Archer - 3rd June 2013 at 19:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It got there around 15:30. The only hitch that I noticed was the Extra 300 that went up to welcome it, it landed after the O-2, got a flat tire and blocked the runway!

By: TonyT - 3rd June 2013 at 19:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Like most GA light twins, it would have had a difficult time taking off with any kind of load on one engine.

Yup, as with most light twins, lose an engine and the other one will simply carry you to the crash site.

By: Wyvernfan - 3rd June 2013 at 20:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Lovely aeroplane. As a kid this was my first experience of a Cessna 0-2 :)

Rob

Attachments

By: Wyvernfan - 3rd June 2013 at 21:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Another 0-2 for sale here... unless its the same one

http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=47678

Rob

By: ZRX61 - 3rd June 2013 at 23:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

They are known in the US as *Mix Masters*..... named after this device: