On Sunday, August 18, 2013 10:42:04 AM UTC-4, Jim Haynes wrote:
On 2013-08-17, extra class wrote:

try 60+



The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952.



Yes, but the ones currently still flying are the B-52H models that

went into service 50 years ago.



jhhaynes at earthlink dot net

Just how safe is a 50 year old flying machine?

wrote:

On Sunday, August 18, 2013 10:42:04 AM UTC-4, Jim Haynes wrote:
On 2013-08-17, extra class wrote:

try 60+



The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952.



Yes, but the ones currently still flying are the B-52H models that

went into service 50 years ago.



jhhaynes at earthlink dot net

Just how safe is a 50 year old flying machine?

Probably pretty darn safe since like some helicopters we had only the air
frame itself is really that old (and even some of that may have been replaced)
the rest having been replaced piece by piece over the decades.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Sunday, August 18, 2013 12:40:56 PM UTC-5, dxAce wrote:
wrote:



On Sunday, August 18, 2013 10:42:04 AM UTC-4, Jim Haynes wrote:

On 2013-08-17, extra class wrote:



try 60+







The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952.







Yes, but the ones currently still flying are the B-52H models that



went into service 50 years ago.







jhhaynes at earthlink dot net



Just how safe is a 50 year old flying machine?



Probably pretty darn safe since like some helicopters we had only the air

frame itself is really that old (and even some of that may have been replaced)

the rest having been replaced piece by piece over the decades.



dxAce

Michigan

USA

The old Bell Huey Helicopters had a lot of vibration in them. That is what caused a lot of them to crash in Vietnam. My brother was a Helicopter Mechanic at Vung Tau, Vietnam. I would feel much safer in a B 52, or an old Gooneybird.

On Sunday, August 18, 2013 2:00:15 PM UTC-4, DhiaDuit wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2013 12:40:56 PM UTC-5, dxAce wrote:

wrote:







On Sunday, August 18, 2013 10:42:04 AM UTC-4, Jim Haynes wrote:



On 2013-08-17, extra class wrote:







try 60+















The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952.















Yes, but the ones currently still flying are the B-52H models that







went into service 50 years ago.















jhhaynes at earthlink dot net







Just how safe is a 50 year old flying machine?







Probably pretty darn safe since like some helicopters we had only the air



frame itself is really that old (and even some of that may have been replaced)



the rest having been replaced piece by piece over the decades.







dxAce



Michigan



USA



The old Bell Huey Helicopters had a lot of vibration in them. That is what caused a lot of them to crash in Vietnam. My brother was a Helicopter Mechanic at Vung Tau, Vietnam. I would feel much safer in a B 52, or an old Gooneybird.

C-47(actually a DC-3) must be the most reliable plane in existence. They are still being used today in several countries . It is an amazing piece of machinery.

On 8/18/13 14:10 , wrote:
C-47(actually a DC-3) must be the most reliable plane in existence. They are still being used today in several countries . It is an amazing piece of machinery.


Many of the radial engines used for C-47's are no longer serviceable
for civilian use, and are limited to public use, which does not require
the stringent standards of civilian service maintenance schedules.

A good number of the C-47's still flying have been converted to turbo
prop engines. They are eerily quiet when flying overhead.


My experience with that aircraft came in the late 60's when Northwest
was flying DC-3's and I was a passenger from Minneapolis to Huron
South Dakota. Those twin 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones were astonishingly
loud in the cabin, and the aircraft was very rough flying. I didn't stop
hurling until two hours after we landed. Like early V-tail Bonanza's,
the DC-3 would fishtail in straight and level flight. It was like riding
in the back of a 63 Galaxy on the interstate.

Finger lickin' unpleasant.

But still, one of the most historically significant aircraft ever built.

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ...


My experience with that aircraft came in the late 60's when Northwest
was flying DC-3's and I was a passenger from Minneapolis to Huron
South Dakota. Those twin 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones were astonishingly
loud in the cabin, and the aircraft was very rough flying. I didn't stop
hurling until two hours after we landed. Like early V-tail Bonanza's,
the DC-3 would fishtail in straight and level flight. It was like riding
in the back of a 63 Galaxy on the interstate.

Finger lickin' unpleasant.

But still, one of the most historically significant aircraft ever built.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, yes... the unparalleled joy and comfort of a DC-3.. United was still
using those things for regional service during my last trip to the states
back in 2001. I had to fly on one from Dulles to Charlottesville, VA. I was
already in bad shape from bad food on the flight from Seoul to Dulles, then
I had to wait for nearly 6 hours since my flight out of Dulles never showed
up, and it took them that long to get another plane there. Finally got out
on the tarmac and there was a DC-3, in all it's glory... it looked from the
outside like it should have been mothballed after WWII, but, alas, it wasn't
and I had to fly on her. I spent most of the flight in the lav, the rest
with a huge headache and my stomach doing flip flops, all accompanied by
that deafening roar. Never again. I'll take a taxi.

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 3:06:49 AM UTC-4, Brenda Dyer wrote:
"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ...





My experience with that aircraft came in the late 60's when Northwest

was flying DC-3's and I was a passenger from Minneapolis to Huron

South Dakota. Those twin 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones were astonishingly

loud in the cabin, and the aircraft was very rough flying. I didn't stop

hurling until two hours after we landed. Like early V-tail Bonanza's,

the DC-3 would fishtail in straight and level flight. It was like riding

in the back of a 63 Galaxy on the interstate.



Finger lickin' unpleasant.



But still, one of the most historically significant aircraft ever built.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Ah, yes... the unparalleled joy and comfort of a DC-3.. United was still

using those things for regional service during my last trip to the states

back in 2001. I had to fly on one from Dulles to Charlottesville, VA. I was

already in bad shape from bad food on the flight from Seoul to Dulles, then

I had to wait for nearly 6 hours since my flight out of Dulles never showed

up, and it took them that long to get another plane there. Finally got out

on the tarmac and there was a DC-3, in all it's glory... it looked from the

outside like it should have been mothballed after WWII, but, alas, it wasn't

and I had to fly on her. I spent most of the flight in the lav, the rest

with a huge headache and my stomach doing flip flops, all accompanied by

that deafening roar. Never again. I'll take a taxi.

From Dulles to Charlottesville is only 100 miles or so...

On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 00:33:57 -0500, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 8/18/13 14:10 , wrote:
C-47(actually a DC-3) must be the most reliable plane in existence. They are still being used today in several countries . It is an amazing piece of machinery.


Many of the radial engines used for C-47's are no longer serviceable
for civilian use, and are limited to public use, which does not require
the stringent standards of civilian service maintenance schedules.

A good number of the C-47's still flying have been converted to turbo
prop engines. They are eerily quiet when flying overhead.


My experience with that aircraft came in the late 60's when Northwest
was flying DC-3's and I was a passenger from Minneapolis to Huron
South Dakota. Those twin 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones were astonishingly
loud in the cabin, and the aircraft was very rough flying. I didn't stop
hurling until two hours after we landed. Like early V-tail Bonanza's,
the DC-3 would fishtail in straight and level flight. It was like riding
in the back of a 63 Galaxy on the interstate.

Finger lickin' unpleasant.

But still, one of the most historically significant aircraft ever built.



My recollection is NW retired their DC-3 well before the late 1960's
(I was living in Madison at the time).By the late 1960's they were
operating L-188's and 707's and 727's.

I suspect the aircraft you were on was actually North Central
Airlines, who did operate DC3 into the late 1960's in may of the same
places NW flew. In fact if you went to Huron, I'd bet it was North
Central rather than NW.

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 4:29:12 PM UTC-5, matt weber wrote:
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 00:33:57 -0500, "D. Peter Maus"

wrote:



On 8/18/13 14:10 , wrote:

C-47(actually a DC-3) must be the most reliable plane in existence. They are still being used today in several countries . It is an amazing piece of machinery.





Many of the radial engines used for C-47's are no longer serviceable

for civilian use, and are limited to public use, which does not require

the stringent standards of civilian service maintenance schedules.



A good number of the C-47's still flying have been converted to turbo

prop engines. They are eerily quiet when flying overhead.





My experience with that aircraft came in the late 60's when Northwest

was flying DC-3's and I was a passenger from Minneapolis to Huron

South Dakota. Those twin 9 cylinder Wright Cyclones were astonishingly

loud in the cabin, and the aircraft was very rough flying. I didn't stop

hurling until two hours after we landed. Like early V-tail Bonanza's,

the DC-3 would fishtail in straight and level flight. It was like riding

in the back of a 63 Galaxy on the interstate.



Finger lickin' unpleasant.



But still, one of the most historically significant aircraft ever built.

On Sunday, August 18, 2013 2:00:15 PM UTC-4, DhiaDuit wrote:
On Sunday, August 18, 2013 12:40:56 PM UTC-5, dxAce wrote:

wrote:







On Sunday, August 18, 2013 10:42:04 AM UTC-4, Jim Haynes wrote:



On 2013-08-17, extra class wrote:







try 60+















The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952.















Yes, but the ones currently still flying are the B-52H models that







went into service 50 years ago.















jhhaynes at earthlink dot net







Just how safe is a 50 year old flying machine?







Probably pretty darn safe since like some helicopters we had only the air



frame itself is really that old (and even some of that may have been replaced)



the rest having been replaced piece by piece over the decades.







dxAce



Michigan



USA



The old Bell Huey Helicopters had a lot of vibration in them. That is what caused a lot of them to crash in Vietnam. My brother was a Helicopter Mechanic at Vung Tau, Vietnam. I would feel much safer in a B 52, or an old Gooneybird.

A B-1B just crashed someplace out West . Cost nearly 300M back when they where making them in the 80's.