Wreckchasing Message Board
Register  |   |   |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 3      Prev   1   2   3
Dennis

Registered:
Posts: 1,182
 #31 
The Texaco plane, A Northrop Gamma, was an all metal plane with a Wright R1820.  No wing fabric (maybe ailerons), and definitely no 54" wooden prop.  Dennis
Treebark

Registered:
Posts: 6
 #32 


Below are comment from Tom Thayer, a fellow volunteer at the Wings Over the Rockies Museum, former owner/pilot '40 Cub J3, degreed aero engineer and is familiar with the airport and near hills.

- Dave Mc

That first item, Daly City, is interesting. As one guy said, the prop is an important clue. The theory that the prop was a pusher is one possibility. The other possibility is that it is a tractor (i.e., a puller) used on a European-built engine. This is possible since European standard for a long time (and maybe still) was for clock-wise rotation as viewed from in front of the plane. (But nosing in and not breaking a prop is unlikely, as they point out.) The Franklin engine suggested by the article is early US product and therefore has a counter-clockwise rotation as viewed from in front of the plane. 

 I'd have to see the prop first hand to render an opinion on whether it is a pusher or tractor prop. The hub of the prop would tell us which side of the prop was bolted to the crank shaft. From there we could match the prop airfoil cross-section to push or pull, and thence to which way the engine turned. No doubt, from the size of the prop, it is a small engine, possibly a Franklin which was used widely.

I agree that the size and lack of metal leading edges on the prop make it a civilian item. Franklin did make a line of small engines. Various models in their Series 2 engines produced from 45 to 60 hp. The fact that three people were in the crash leads me to wonder about just how small the engine was. Our J-3 Cub had a Continental A-65 which put out 65 hp, and it couldn't have gotten more than two people off the ground with anything left for decent performance. Incidentally, we flew our Cub out of Palo Alto, a field just a ways down the peninsula from Daly City.

As an aside and purely "what if" thinking , there is no mention of what the crash site was like. The assumption that the crash was on a hillside led the analysis to a nose-in crash, doing damage to a prop on a tractor configuration. Suppose the pilot managed an angle that somehow saved the prop? I found a plane that used a Franklin Series 4 engine, a Stinson Model 10A, that conveniently had three seats. It was a 1939 design. Wikipedia says it had a Franklin 4AC-99 engine putting out 90 hp. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stinson_Voyager#Specifications_.28105.29 )

Another question: is it known that the engine was a Franklin?

If those guys keep asking questions and can gain access to the prop, they should be able to noodle it out. The guy who wants wing rib measurements is also onto something. With those measurements the cross-section of the airfoil can be determined, its shape is similar to a Clark Y, a common airfoil of early planes. Size and placement of the rib trusses can be instructive to those who build or repair old planes. The size and placement of the spar or spars can tell them things, too. Wikipedia says the Stinson Model 10A was also powered by a Continental A-75-3. They list the airfoil as NACA 4412, incidentally. That could be useful in verifying the wing rib as a Stinson or not.

These are all guesses on my part, some admittedly in the weeds , but I think they are reasonable guesses.

TomT.

Treebark

Registered:
Posts: 6
 #33 
Tom's p.s.:

I also missed the fact that Phil says the crash was listed as having occurred in 1933. That rules out my guess at a Stinson 10A which is of 1939 vintage. I'll keep looking. There are some interesting planes made by Monocoupe that bear some investigation.

 - TomT
DaveTrojan

Avatar / Picture

Moderators
Registered:
Posts: 2,261
 #34 
We do not know the date of the accident, All we know for sure is that it was pre-WWII.

Dennis

Registered:
Posts: 1,182
 #35 
The reverse pitch 54" prop still is a major factor.  Typically, a 65 Hp Used about a 6 foot prop.  Don't know what props the old Continental A-40s (40 HP flathead 4 cylinder) used, but it had to be a real l ow powered plane.  Dennis
philthyinc

Registered:
Posts: 12
 #36 
sorry guys I've been busy with x mass stuff and grandmother is not well
__________________
pr
philthyinc

Registered:
Posts: 12
 #37 
ill call my grandpas cousin this week to try an obtain the pics and more info 
__________________
pr
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: