-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
The Ongoing Mystery Aircraft Thread Part Deux.
- Thread starter Ferry_vO
- Start date
This is a Noorduyn Norseman which has been modified with a different landing gear strut configuration and what appears to be a larger V.Stabilizer. It also appears to have the panoramic window modification. Norseman Mk.I - 420HP Wright, MK.II - 420HP Wright, MK.III - 450HP P&W R-985, MK.IV - 550HP P&W R-1340, MK.VI - 600HP P&W R-1340, MK.V (Built after the Mk.VI - "V" designation was saved for 'victory' after WWII - built by Canadian Car & Foundry for civilian use) - also used the 600HP P&W R-1340. There was also one metallized prototype MK.VII, but performance suffered due to the extra weight. Project was dropped. Hard to tell which Mark this one is/was, except I'm pretty sure it's not a Mk.VI as they used 2 bladed props.
Looking at the picture I also noticed that the lift struts seem to be beefed up as compared to the standard struts of all the Norseman I've seen.
Looking at the picture I also noticed that the lift struts seem to be beefed up as compared to the standard struts of all the Norseman I've seen.
DHC2Pilot can be on the right track with the Norseman connection since it is sometimes rumored that is was built from (or influenced by) the famous Dutch Canadian.
However, this one comes from a country, not that far away (but still in Asia)
and the manufacturer still build airplanes.
The jury will accept two designations.
However, this one comes from a country, not that far away (but still in Asia)
and the manufacturer still build airplanes.
The jury will accept two designations.
DHC2Pilot, no reason to feel dumb, to the contrary
You may be absolutely correct in that it is (was) a Norseman However, I never was able to get confirmation on that and that is why I still wonder about the engine (P&W?, Alvis?, Russian?).
The aircraft is the Hindustan HCP-125 a.k.a. the L.A.S. for Logistic Air Support. First flown in September 1960 and developed under leadership of Dr.
C.N.Ghatage and intended as light transport (8-10 seat), flying ambulance etc. One story goes is that it may have been a modified Norseman with a 3-bladed prop, additional cabin windows, curved l/e on the vertical tail, a modified u/c attachment with small stubs supporting the main wheels (see photo) rather than the more standard fuselage gear legs. If there is a Norseman connection I would opt for the 600hp P&W R-1340 as engine. Although I never found out what engine was used, reports indicated that is was a 600hp unit. Btw, did the Indian AF not operate the Norseman?
So..... now I stay up all night to see all the info on this aircraft coming in.
Open House please
You may be absolutely correct in that it is (was) a Norseman However, I never was able to get confirmation on that and that is why I still wonder about the engine (P&W?, Alvis?, Russian?).
The aircraft is the Hindustan HCP-125 a.k.a. the L.A.S. for Logistic Air Support. First flown in September 1960 and developed under leadership of Dr.
C.N.Ghatage and intended as light transport (8-10 seat), flying ambulance etc. One story goes is that it may have been a modified Norseman with a 3-bladed prop, additional cabin windows, curved l/e on the vertical tail, a modified u/c attachment with small stubs supporting the main wheels (see photo) rather than the more standard fuselage gear legs. If there is a Norseman connection I would opt for the 600hp P&W R-1340 as engine. Although I never found out what engine was used, reports indicated that is was a 600hp unit. Btw, did the Indian AF not operate the Norseman?
So..... now I stay up all night to see all the info on this aircraft coming in.
Open House please
If in fact it was a modified Norseman, it'd be interesting to learn what they were trying to accomplish by increasing the size of the V.Stab - the Norseman had plenty of rudder authority - either on wheels or floats. My father owned a Norseman on floats years ago in Int'l Falls, Minnesota and said it flew nicely, albeit not as easy on the controls as a Beaver, and couldn't match the Beaver's or Otters STOL capability. I guess this just goes to show that there's always someone that has to tinker with things, good enough or not. 
lefty
SOH-CM-2023
And this one certainly doesn't suffer from an excess of vertical stabilization.... Think it's another Aerofiles special.
BTW, Wout, the HCP-25 seems to have only the briefest mention in any of my tomes. However, the earlier HT-10 used a P&W R-1830 - maybe it is conceivable they used the same unit for the later aircraft ? Dashed economical, these Indian wallahs, what ?
BTW, Wout, the HCP-25 seems to have only the briefest mention in any of my tomes. However, the earlier HT-10 used a P&W R-1830 - maybe it is conceivable they used the same unit for the later aircraft ? Dashed economical, these Indian wallahs, what ?
Ferry_vO
Retired SOH Administrator
Sooooo close... It's the Spartan 7X Executive:
7X Executive (Standard Seven) 1935 = 4pClwM rg; 285hp Jacobs L-5; span: 39'0" length: 26'8" v: 160/150/45 range: 800. Small tail, long dorsal fin. POP: 1 prototype of the 7 series; ff: 2 (?>3)/19/35 [X/NC13984] c/n 0. Reportedly delivered to Mexico.
lefty
SOH-CM-2023
Reminds me of this.....
[YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PeeAI1wTMiA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PeeAI1wTMiA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
[YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PeeAI1wTMiA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PeeAI1wTMiA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
I posted that particular photo for exactly that reason. Needed a hint of ambiguity there to try to throw you all off.
Edit: Lefty, you are right of course on the Vultee. How about posting a new one? Ferry seems to be away.
Ferry_vO
Retired SOH Administrator
Just got home from work, but of course Lefty is right about the Vultee.
P.s. Mike: Aeroplane, January 2010, page 35.