This made me chuckle. Shouldn't it be PC9? Just kidding...just kidding....
P-3 or CP-140?
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1887
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
- CH124 Driver
- Rank 2
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 12:01 pm
- Location: 12 Wing
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
If it were a PC9, yes. But it’s not. They’re different with different designators.
https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC86 ... earch.aspx
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1887
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
True in a sense but it' not always the case. An example is the Russian built Lisunov Li-2, a copy of the DC-3 where no parts are compatible due to the fact that they are all measured in metric, but shares the same ICAO designator of DC-3. The Beech Mk. II (aka Texan II/Harvard II) is essentially a Pilatus PC-9 but has it's own designator.CH124 Driver wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:01 pmIf it were a PC9, yes. But it’s not. They’re different with different designators.
https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC86 ... earch.aspx
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
I used to be a tech on the aurora and I have flown many time with the aircraft in the us, Canada and internationally. I can’t remember them using the p3 designator in Canada but I heard them use it many times outside Canada. They would use it with their CANFORCE callsign.
Basically, the first aurora was a p3 airframe with the s2 Vikings avionics suite but with the latest bloc II and III avionics, it’s a totally different animal today that has nothing to do with the original.
Basically, the first aurora was a p3 airframe with the s2 Vikings avionics suite but with the latest bloc II and III avionics, it’s a totally different animal today that has nothing to do with the original.