Roost Air Lounge => Aviation related topics => Topic started by: cj5_pilot on September 21, 2006, 01:41:52 AM
Title: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 21, 2006, 01:41:52 AM
Ok, maybe somebody started one of these and I overlooked it. Still, step up to the plate and NAME THAT PLANE! The more detail the better! Your prize is nothing less then BRAGGING RIGHTS!!!!!!!
Ok, this picture was taken at Merrill field, Anchorage Alaska, on November 21st, 2003 by yours truly. This one should be fairly straight forward to ID. I'm sure with the knowledge base on this board, somebody will figure it out in short order!
Edit... Running the tail number through the FAA databade reveals it to be a Beech C-45G (Beech 18) but it's the Volpar tri-gear single tail STC, Basically what you have is a radial powered Queen air... Hang some PT-6's on it and you get the equivalent of a King Air c-90 without pressurization.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 21, 2006, 04:20:37 AM
Very good! Though the info I have says it's a PAC (Pacific Aircraft Company) Conversion, one of 31. The tri-gear was originally a Volpar conversion and the single tail was PAC from what I heard. But don't hold me to it, that's info I got from the web ;) I was VERY curious when I first saw it :)
BTW, awesome flightsim job dude!
OK, I'll have to toss out another. I took this pic with a 35mm and scanned it in a LONG time ago. It's at the Alaska Air Museum, PDC (Pre Digital Camera). I'd guess 98-2001. Sorry for the poor resolution and bad lighting. Again, this should be an easy one for THIS crowd :) I'll have to make the next one tougher!
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Mic on September 21, 2006, 06:53:37 AM
It's a Bellanca Air cruiser isn't ?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 21, 2006, 02:24:24 PM
And another winner! Indeed, this one from Tillamook Air Museum, January of 1999.
Ok, this next pic is one I DIDN'T take, but is from a "for sale" website. I HAVE seen the aircraft in question though as there is one in Birchwood. It's probably THE most rare plane I've seen. I took pics of it and a beautifully restored Beech 18 in Navy colors the same day, though I can't find em on the computer.
That ones too dang easy ;D ;D It started life as a Beech 18. now it's a Volpar Tri-gear with the further mod to a C-90 style single tail. and here's the one I made for Microsoft Flight Sim
Is-it available somewhere on the web ?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: BrianGMFS on September 21, 2006, 05:42:07 PM
That ones too dang easy ;D ;D It started life as a Beech 18. now it's a Volpar Tri-gear with the further mod to a C-90 style single tail. and here's the one I made for Microsoft Flight Sim
Is-it available somewhere on the web ?
go to http://www.avsim.com and do a file library search for brian gladden and volpar ;D
Brian
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: FlyingBlind on September 21, 2006, 09:19:18 PM
Guess it :P I can give you a hint - we use it for jumping... and i have said this before somewhere sometime
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 21, 2006, 10:56:20 PM
Anatov AN-2 "Colt" ;D
No takers on that small twin yet?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Turbomallard on September 22, 2006, 01:57:33 AM
Anyone want to take a stab at this one (N number and name have been deleted so as not to give it away). Hints: It's a one of a kind and holds two speed records!
TM
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on September 22, 2006, 01:27:43 PM
Anyone want to take a stab at this one (N number and name have been deleted so as not to give it away). Hints: It's a one of a kind and holds two speed records!
TM
Looks kind of like a Sonex......but sleeker.......HMMMMM ??? And that light twin by cj5 looks like something designed for flying missionaries ???
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Turbomallard on September 22, 2006, 02:28:28 PM
Anyone want to take a stab at this one (N number and name have been deleted so as not to give it away). Hints: It's a one of a kind and holds two speed records!
TM
Looks kind of like a Sonex......but sleeker.......HMMMMM ??? And that light twin by cj5 looks like something designed for flying missionaries ???
You're getting warmer! The speed records the airplane set date from 1982 and are unbroken as yet...
TM
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on September 22, 2006, 09:57:32 PM
Is it John Monnett's Monex Racer? ???
It resembles a Sonex, and John Monnett, the sonex designer holds numerous speed records in the Monex Racer, but I couldn't find any pictures of it. >:(
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Turbomallard on September 22, 2006, 10:30:21 PM
It resembles a Sonex, and John Monnett, the sonex designer holds numerous speed records in the Monex Racer, but I couldn't find any pictures of it. >:(
Phil
Congratulations! You win the prize... or, at least, you would if we had one. It is indeed the Monex. The picture posted is circa 1980-81 outside the original building of Monnett Experimental Aircraft, Elgin, Illinois. The airplane went through numerous wing changes in efforts to make it more stable. Finally Roy LoPresti, brought over to the airplane at Oshkosh, fixed it (as much as could be without making drastic changes) by taping yarn to the bottom of the ailerons. Roy recognized that the ailerons were so tapered at their trailing edge that they operated inside the boundary layer, and only became effective when significantly deflected, at which point they overcontrolled the airplane. The Monex is a lot smaller than it looks, and you can raise the tail by pressing on the prop spinner with one finger... no kidding!
TM
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on September 23, 2006, 06:14:54 AM
Hey Bob, Remeber this little beauty...
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: BrianGMFS on September 23, 2006, 02:38:30 PM
It's a Varga Kachina.... maybe I should go hide in a corner and let the rest of you guys play ;D ;D
Brian
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on September 24, 2006, 03:42:18 AM
AHHH, at last one I know---built first as a Vorrisey, aquired and built as a Shinn, then sold to an indian group who produced it as the Varga Kachina----nice little plane but performance rather limited (slow and dirty--not a lot of power) 8)
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on September 24, 2006, 08:51:40 AM
Right you are. Spotted this one in Palmer a while back. I had to do some digging to figure out what it was. Cute little plane though, always wondered how they fly. :)
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on September 24, 2006, 09:00:28 AM
Anyone about this one? I took the photo at Arlington, 2003. I've no idea what it is, but was part of the 'Russian Thunder' aerobatic duo.
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 24, 2006, 06:25:56 PM
Ya got me stumped on that one Tundra. The tail looks like it came off a P-39 or P-63 though ;D
By the way the twin I posted earlier is designed for missionaries. It's called an Evangelair, and I can't seem to find the pics I took of the one in Birchwood! >:( I also had some pics of a beautiful Beech 18 I took at the same time. :'( Oh well, guess it's an excuse for another trip to Birchwood! ;D
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: BrianGMFS on September 24, 2006, 06:53:59 PM
Quote
Anyone about this one? I took the photo at Arlington, 2003. I've no idea what it is, but was part of the 'Russian Thunder' aerobatic duo.
I know what it is... But I'll wait and see if anyone else can guess it ;D ;D
Brian
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 24, 2006, 08:28:47 PM
Anyone about this one? I took the photo at Arlington, 2003. I've no idea what it is, but was part of the 'Russian Thunder' aerobatic duo.
Phil
I'm going to hazard that it's a Yak-18 or a CJ-5 or CJ-6 (the chinese copies). If I had to guess I'd say specifically a Yak-18T.
Ok this is a web photo, not my work. However one of our freight couriers has one of these. He may even reply to this since I introduced him to Chicken Wings last week!
I'm going to hazard that it's a Yak-18 or a CJ-5 or CJ-6 (the Chinese copies). If I had to guess I'd say specifically a Yak-18T.
DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! We have a winner LOL
It's a Yak-18T, the CJ-6 is a Chinese licence built variant of the Yak-52 (I had a Yak-52 show up on my ramp Friday night for customs)
Brian
I've had a couple people ask me if I own a CJ-5 plane...I used to tell them mine's the American Motors Coproration one with a 304 V-8 ;D Sold it though and buiding up a CJ-7 with a stroked 4.0 I-6.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on September 25, 2006, 04:04:13 AM
Hey! Could that be what Baradium's friend saw the other day?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Baradium on September 25, 2006, 04:29:53 AM
Hey! Could that be what Baradium's friend saw the other day?
That would fit the description.
What about this?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Baradium on September 25, 2006, 04:31:28 AM
Or this?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on September 25, 2006, 09:03:48 AM
Them be Beech 99s AND as a matter of fact, the first one 7862R, is still owned by Ameriflight (Cal Air Charter) and I've got a couple hundred hours in her, running freight on the west coast about 25 years ago 8)
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on September 25, 2006, 03:41:31 PM
Fireflyr, that is down right amazing! Only in aviation would somebody post a pic on a forum and somebody go "Hey I used to fly her!" ;D
That might be partly because only in aviation does anyone actually *fly* something. ;)
As far as the 99s, if you looked it up in the registry, shame! ;)
I thought a 99 was appropriate since someone said the conversion beech 18 would be like an "unpressurized C90 kingair" if it had the turbine conversion. I think it'd be closer to a C99 myself. ;) Although technically speaking the 99 is a different airframe then the rest. Interestingly enough Beech designed the 99 as the replacement to the Beech 18 it'd seem... ;)
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on September 25, 2006, 07:52:25 PM
Fireflyr, that is down right amazing! Only in aviation would somebody post a pic on a forum and somebody go "Hey I used to fly her!" ;D
That might be partly because only in aviation does anyone actually *fly* something. ;)
As far as the 99s, if you looked it up in the registry, shame! ;)
I thought a 99 was appropriate since someone said the conversion beech 18 would be like an "unpressurized C90 kingair" if it had the turbine conversion. I think it'd be closer to a C99 myself. ;) Although technically speaking the 99 is a different airframe then the rest. Interestingly enough Beech designed the 99 as the replacement to the Beech 18 it'd seem... ;)
The 99 was designed from the onset for commuter airline use as there were no other aircraft to fill that niche at the time---before then, small airports were served by DC-3s.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: YawningMan on October 02, 2006, 06:21:44 PM
The angle on the second Beech 99 makes it look like the prop is tapping on the window.
"Excuse me, it's cold out here. Can the engine come in?"
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: spacer on October 03, 2006, 01:43:02 AM
And another winner! Indeed, this one from Tillamook Air Museum, January of 1999.
Ok, this next pic is one I DIDN'T take, but is from a "for sale" website. I HAVE seen the aircraft in question though as there is one in Birchwood. It's probably THE most rare plane I've seen. I took pics of it and a beautifully restored Beech 18 in Navy colors the same day, though I can't find em on the computer.
I've met the successor to the above plane, parked at our maintenance hangar for a few days in Little Rock. (http://www.angelaircraft.com/images/TakeOff.jpg)
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: BrianGMFS on October 03, 2006, 02:34:23 AM
Ahhh, The Angel 44....
Brian
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on October 03, 2006, 02:50:07 AM
I've wondered about the pusher props. Seems to Tundra and me that they are more easily damaged by rocks from the gear. Thoughts?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on October 03, 2006, 07:48:49 AM
I've wondered about the pusher props. Seems to Tundra and me that they are more easily damaged by rocks from the gear. Thoughts?
Without a doubt, that would be a problem to consider, I've had to file some humongous dings out the rear prop on the mixmaster. One was bad enough that I had a mechanic call Macauley for specs on the maximum amount that could be filed out, and it was just barely legal! In addition to the possibilty of FOD problems, the airplane has a single engine cieling of 3800 feet which is pretty dismal performance---that means if you're at a sea level airport on a 105 degree day and you pop one on takeoff----I reckon you'll land (crash) just off the departure end ! Having two engines just guarantees twice the chance for an engine failure and if it won't perform well on one, you are screwed ! :-\
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on October 03, 2006, 03:20:11 PM
That's one nice thing about having an engine failure in a single engine plane...fewer decisions to make!
Tundra is a more experienced than I in that area. He had an incident or two in his Antares as well as one in the Tundra toy. I've been lucky so far and the closest I've come to an engine failure is having to hand prop :P
OK, time for a new plane! This one should be easy since there are so many fire fighting pilots on here. Some of these were used in Cailifornia by the state I believe:
It's a very distinct plane imho, kind of cool looking too, I've seen several of them for MSFS. I wonder if one can use it as a private plane :D
Frank
There's 28 of em' on the FAA registration database. 16 of which belong to the US Forrest Service. A few seem to be in private hands as they are registered as experimental aircraft due to their being former military aircraft.
Brian
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on October 03, 2006, 05:53:29 PM
It's a very distinct plane imho, kind of cool looking too, I've seen several of them for MSFS. I wonder if one can use it as a private plane :D
Frank
There's 28 of em' on the FAA registration database. 16 of which belong to the US Forrest Service. A few seem to be in private hands as they are registered as experimental aircraft due to their being former military aircraft.
Brian
I almost got a ride in one back in my CAP cadet days...but another cadet had shinyer boots!
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on October 03, 2006, 10:06:31 PM
Quote
I've wondered about the pusher props. Seems to Tundra and me that they are more easily damaged by rocks from the gear. Thoughts?
My only pursher experience is with the ultralights, but even those little engines and props would suck up some surpizing sized gravel. We did notice that the planes with wheel pants got a lot more life out of their props. But the underside of the wheel pants got beat up pretty quick. ;) The Antares MA-33 was quite an improvement over the MA-30 since it had 15" of prop clearance, and it was very rare that I dinged the prop. Some of the european trikes had as little as 4" of prop clearance, and those really took a beating.
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on October 03, 2006, 10:22:57 PM
Quote
Tundra is a more experienced than I in that area. He had an incident or two in his Antares as well as one in the Tundra toy. I've been lucky so far and the closest I've come to an engine failure is having to hand prop
I haven't had to make a forced landing yet, but I've had a few short engine failures followed by restarts, and at least one precautionary landing. Surprizingly I've had far more trouble with O-200 in my 150 that I ever had with the Rotax 503 in my ultralight. Maby not surprizing, the Rotax was brand new, the Continental is 40+ years old, and I've flown it 3 times as much.
1. Flooded the engine in my ultralight at 8,000AGL, lots of time for a restart. No in-flight mixture control.
2. Strange vibration during climb out caused me to do a quick 180 and limp back to the airport at minimum power in the 150. Resulted in a major overhaul: 2 cracked cylinders, crank journal out of round, center main bearing slipping, carb generally worn out, 2 different styles of pistons (one of which hadn't been made for 30 years).
3. Grabbed mixture instead of carb heat on down wind once. Only took a couple seconds to figure that out and fix it.
4. Carb heat scat hose full of rain water killed the engine during a downwind departure once, (thought I got it all dried out on the ground, there's a drain in the low point now. :p ) Engine restarted as soon as I went back to cold air.
5. REALLY bad carb ice a couple times caused a complete loss of power on climb out for a few second untill carb heat cleared it enough to recover.
So yeah, a second engine that'd at least stretch the glide a bit sounds like a very nice thing to me. ;)
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on October 04, 2006, 02:43:12 AM
[quote
So yeah, a second engine that'd at least stretch the glide a bit sounds like a very nice thing to me. ;)
Phil
Quote
Yes, that is true in the right circumstances---had the left front cylinder depart the aircraft one dark night in IMC but I was in fat city at 9,000 feet climbing out from OAK, but if it had happened 15 minutes earlier, well, I would have been pretty busy.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: spacer on October 04, 2006, 03:06:48 AM
I've wondered about the pusher props. Seems to Tundra and me that they are more easily damaged by rocks from the gear. Thoughts?
Without a doubt, that would be a problem to consider, I've had to file some humongous dings out the rear prop on the mixmaster. One was bad enough that I had a mechanic call Macauley for specs on the maximum amount that could be filed out, and it was just barely legal! In addition to the possibilty of FOD problems, the airplane has a single engine cieling of 3800 feet which is pretty dismal performance---that means if you're at a sea level airport on a 105 degree day and you pop one on takeoff----I reckon you'll land (crash) just off the departure end ! Having two engines just guarantees twice the chance for an engine failure and if it won't perform well on one, you are screwed ! :-\
That's a number which caught my eye as well. Much of the flying I'd like to do is at higher elevations. Heck, I grew up at 4000 asl. If I'm gonna have to deal with the expense and trouble to lug along an extra mill, it's gotta be able to pay the rent.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on October 04, 2006, 03:15:37 AM
So yeah, a second engine that'd at least stretch the glide a bit sounds like a very nice thing to me. ;)
Phil
Quote
Yes, that is true in the right circumstances---had the left front cylinder depart the aircraft one dark night in IMC but I was in fat city at 9,000 feet climbing out from OAK, but if it had happened 15 minutes earlier, well, I would have been pretty busy.
Yeah, but all you have to do is shut down the second engine and you're no worse off than a single engine ;) Ok, a very heavy draggy single.
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: spacer on October 04, 2006, 03:20:57 AM
So yeah, a second engine that'd at least stretch the glide a bit sounds like a very nice thing to me. ;)
Yeah, it'll get you all the way to the crash site. |:)\
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on October 04, 2006, 04:48:10 AM
bah....
with a twin you got all these DECISIONS.....bad for the blood pressure.....
with a single you only got to figure out where to crash/land ;D
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Baradium on October 05, 2006, 05:24:43 AM
I thought that there were versions of the skymasters with enough horsepower to perform pretty well single engine. They don't have nearly the amount of power loss from a conventional twin due to the centerline thrust part at least.
There's also a turbine version with the rear engine removed for more cargo space IIRC.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on October 05, 2006, 02:33:34 PM
I thought that there were versions of the skymasters with enough horsepower to perform pretty well single engine. They don't have nearly the amount of power loss from a conventional twin due to the centerline thrust part at least.
There's also a turbine version with the rear engine removed for more cargo space IIRC.
While the centerline thrust concept does away with assymetrical engine problems, the fact still remains that is when you lose 50% of your power you also lose 80-90% of your performance. The Skymaster has a fairly high accident rate stemming from the misconception that it's a no-brainer to lose an engine. A twin with an engine out needs special attention no matter where the engines are located and needs to be trained for just like any twin! It is very dangerous to think this airplane will not bite you in the event of an engine failure. Normally asperated 337s have a single engine cieling of about 7,000 feet with the front engine caged and about 5,000 feet with the rear feathered. The turbocharged models have cielings of 13,000 and 15,000 respectively---you will notice by those numbers that the rear engine is much more efficient because of aerodynamics. As far as load carrying ability, well, if you want to fill all four seats and carry 100 lbs of baggage then you better only have 2 hours of fuel onboard, and even then, if you pop one on rotation on a warm day, you better be planning on landing off airport! ;)
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: FB41 on October 05, 2006, 02:50:39 PM
I've had 4 engine failures in twins; 1 each Aztec and AeroCommander 680 and 2 in a C337. Of the 4, the one in the Mixmaster gave me the biggest scare and came the closest to landing off airport.
The hardest thing about them is detecting the loss of the REAR engine and by the time I realized it, I didn't get the prop feathered in time. This gave me a real tense 5 minutes before I finally got the damn thing restarted. I watched the gauges like a hawk after that and caught it when it failed AGAIN! Since I was near an airport I managed to land OK and had it checked. Turned out that the ignition harness had shorts in it.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on October 05, 2006, 03:14:58 PM
Quote
Turned out that the ignition harness had shorts in it.
I hate it when my shorts get caught in the ignition. :P
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: fireflyr on October 06, 2006, 12:42:07 PM
I've had 4 engine failures in twins; 1 each Aztec and AeroCommander 680 and 2 in a C337. Of the 4, the one in the Mixmaster gave me the biggest scare and came the closest to landing off airport.
The hardest thing about them is detecting the loss of the REAR engine and by the time I realized it, I didn't get the prop feathered in time. This gave me a real tense 5 minutes before I finally got the damn thing restarted. I watched the gauges like a hawk after that and caught it when it failed AGAIN! Since I was near an airport I managed to land OK and had it checked. Turned out that the ignition harness had shorts in it.
Surest way to detect an engine out in the 337 is to watch the fuel flow guages and ALWAYS lead power up with the rear engine.
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: spacer on October 08, 2006, 05:40:47 AM
Uh, I wondered where my shorts went... May I have them back now? :o
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on October 09, 2006, 12:50:03 AM
Ok, time for a new plane!
I'll give you one hint: A plane of this type is shown briefly in the old Disney movie "The Boatniks"
This is part of a museum collection, but unless you know they got it, you don't get to see it. Plane has a lot of historical significance in Alaska. They got the wings and tailfeathers covered, and the engine has had a full rebuild. It just needs covered and all the hundreds of little details to make it perfect. Museum is out of money, but has some surplus C-123 parts they'd love to sell!
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Baradium on October 09, 2006, 02:52:39 AM
That movie is waaaaay before my time. :P
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: Baradium on October 09, 2006, 02:59:01 AM
Is that the same type as the one in the airport hanging from the ceiling?
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: spacer on October 09, 2006, 03:25:31 AM
Ooh, harder to tell without skin. Travelair, perhaps?
I think this one's been done on the board before, but it's so purty I'll toss it up again. And yes, this has recently flown. 8)
This is part of a museum collection, but unless you know they got it, you don't get to see it. Plane has a lot of historical significance in Alaska. They got the wings and tailfeathers covered, and the engine has had a full rebuild. It just needs covered and all the hundreds of little details to make it perfect. Museum is out of money, but has some surplus C-123 parts they'd love to sell!
Pretty sure I know this one...but will see if anyone else gets it.
Phil
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: BrianGMFS on October 09, 2006, 02:35:33 PM
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: cj5_pilot on October 10, 2006, 05:22:40 AM
Depending on who you talk to (including Bob Reeve's daughter) it's either a Fairchild 71 or a Fairchild F2WC....which are darn near the same thing as I can tell. But yeah, it's one of 3 (or 4 depending on historian) Fairchilds flown by Bob Reeve. From what I can tell he had a F-51, 2 F-71s and a F2WC. Which one this is is unclear though I feel it's either the later F-71 or F2WC. His daughter marrid Don Shelton and she is still around. She's VERY attached to this airframe and PERSONALLY moved it from it's old home at the Alaska State Fair Grounds to it's current home at the Alaska Museum of Transporation and Industry in Wasilla......you'd be SURPRISED at what aircraft are there...some are VERY rare!
Title: Re: Name that plane!
Post by: tundra_flier on October 10, 2006, 05:34:49 AM
Depending on who you talk to (including Bob Reeve's daughter) it's either a Fairchild 72 or a Fairchild F2WC....which are darn near the same thing as I can tell. But yeah, it's one of 3 (or 4 depending on historian) Fairchilds flown by Bob Reeve. From what I can tell he had a F-51, 2 F-71s and a F2WC. Which one this is is unclear though I feel it's either the later F-71 or F2WC. His daughter marrid Don Shelton and she is still around. She's VERY attached to this airframe and PERSONALLY moved it from it's old home at the Alaska State Fair Grounds to it's current home at the Alaska Museum of Transporation and Industry in Wasilla......you'd be SURPRISED at what aircraft are there...some are VERY rare!
I was going to say it was an F-2, the 71's have a much wider nose that doesn't taper much from the cabin and also a different landing gear configuration. The gear on the 71 includes a strut up to the side of the fuselage similar to the Fairchild 24, but that might just be missing from this collection of parts. ;)
