Wasaya has a DC3??

ninjacrumb · Post by **ninjacrumb** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 6:45 am

Happened to be in YRL yesterday and saw a DCc down in the Wasaya corner, have they bought one of these? Replacing Hawkers with DC3s, seems like a backwards step to me.

Anyone have any details?

Hot Fuel · Post by **Hot Fuel** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 7:07 am

Backwards? I guess that would depend, was it a DC-3 or was it the BT-67?

Hickory Stick · Post by **Hickory Stick** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:05 am

its a Bassler coversion

Idriveplane · Post by **Idriveplane** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:23 am

Their chartering it from enterprise air in oshawa, to replace one of their hawkers they chartered out

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:53 am

The DC3 is the best twin engine bush pane ever made, with turbines it is even better....

So getting one would be a step foward..not a step backward.

flaps40 · Post by **flaps40** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:07 am

Here,Here. They trully were an amazing machine, It would operate quite nicely with a six thousand pound load out of two thousand feet, 3000 ft elev. Never flew a sweeter machine.

Donald · Post by **Donald** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:36 am

It would operate quite nicely with a six thousand pound load out of two thousand feet, 3000 ft elev.

Will it (BT-67) do that in todays regulated world of balanced field lengths and take-off performance charts?

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:40 am

Be sure and order this option:

http://www.baslerturbo.com/gauguns.html

flaps40 · Post by **flaps40** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:42 am

Must admit that was a long time ago. If moving paxs probably not.

ski_bum · Post by **ski_bum** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:53 am

Hedley wrote:Be sure and order this option:

http://www.baslerturbo.com/gauguns.html

Wholey Crap...

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:03 am

Yeah, wouldn't it be great to do a little pylon turn around Tower C with that honey?

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:45 am

" Will it (BT-67) do that in todays regulated world of balanced field lengths and take-off performance charts? "

Hmmmm...lets see ....

For decades we flew these machines off unprepared surfaces including roads bulldozed out of the bush where we sometimes landed and took off on roads with curves and up and down slopes....the balanced field length regs did not seem to come into the picture then, but guess what there were balanced field lengts rules then so what has changed?

Are you guys no longer able to fly the DC3 on wheel skis?

How do they determine balanced field length on snow and ice surfaces that no one has ever landed on before?

AAhhhh..I know...Merlin Preuss has to go and do the flying first, to ensure you are safe...

Cat

Baby Waboose · Post by **Baby Waboose** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 am

I'm sure the DC3 is a great airplane, it certainly has withstood the test of time, and the Turbo must be all that better. I think however it falls short as a real replacement for the aging 748s. Hawkers, especially with a large freight door can carry 12000+ of freight, put a roller floor in it and a forklift can scoop it out of the back in no time. My sympathy to the buggers that have to hand bomb a lift of drywall into the back, UPHILL! Ouch.

Cat if you're insinuating the DC3 is an adequate replacement for the tired old Hawker I must disagree. Not including the Darts the 748 is a remarkable airplane. Just to bad it burns as much fuel per hour as the friggin Titanic.

How about replacing with CASA 235s or those USAF Spartans (~30 million, double ouch). Now that would be progressive, 21st century technology.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:26 am

Can you put a 748 on skis?

Can a 748 land on the same unprepared surfaces on wheels that a 3 can?

Cat

ski_bum · Post by **ski_bum** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:29 am

Baby Waboose wrote:I'm sure the DC3 is a great airplane, it certainly has withstood the test of time, and the Turbo must be all that better.

The turbine may make it a better aircraft, but it makes it sound pretty pansy. The radial engined aircarft are like the Harley's of the sky, they look cool, may not be the most comfy ride, but when you hear one running the hair on your back stands on end.

Baby Waboose wrote:My sympathy to the buggers that have to hand bomb a lift of drywall into the back, UPHILL! Ouch.

You get used to it pretty quick, and the benifits of hand bombing are the games you can play. Like the great "HEAVY BOX FAKE". I am sure most people on this forum have pulled that trick or had it pulled on them. Its always a good laugh...

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:33 am

Fortunately handbombing is not required thanks to a handy dandy device called a winch. Pallet goes in door, bulkhead winch gets hooked up to pallet, pallet hauls itself up the hill, pilot stops winch. Voila!
Now we can park the 748s!
Cheers,
Snoopy

Baby Waboose · Post by **Baby Waboose** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:52 am

Why would anyone want to put a 748 on skis? I'm sure it is possible. A 737 could probably go on skis. I'm not trying to disrespect DC3s here, they're 2 different airplanes. A DC3 will never pull 10000 pounds off a 3500 foot strip.

I don't think landing on snow and unprepared strips was what Hawkers were meant for. 3500' gravel is its niche. Though landing and taking off in a foot and a half of snow has been easily accomplished. Austin Airways, Kelner, First Air replaced there DC3 with 748s for a reason.

What I consider progressive is not having to hand bomb, whether loading, or unloading. A DC3 will forever be a hand bomb airplane, therefore limiting the freight it can carry. 5000 pound generators are out of the question. Winches are great if you can get it in the door. How about something pressusied as well. Turbine or not DC3s will never be pressurized. Having to fly at 5000 feet cause the chip boxes will explode licks ass. Couple that with 5000, 160 knots in the bumpy summer time and you have a recipe for nausea.

How about a DC3 as a sched machine! Thats just cruel. Hawkers do okay flying passengers, there even surprisingly quiet inside.

I'm telling ya, CASA 235, thats the way to go.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:00 pm

Exactly my point, the DC3 and the 748 are very different machines.

However all things considered I don't know of anyother big twin that is as versatile as a 3 and as easy to fly.

Did you work for Austins?

Cat

linecrew · Post by **linecrew** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:02 pm

Cat Driver wrote:Can you put a 748 on skis?

Can a 748 land on the same unprepared surfaces on wheels that a 3 can?

Cat

They were both very good aircraft and to say one was completely better than the other is liek comparing apples to oranges. The DC-3 is an all around great aircraft that trumps the 748 in a number of areas. The 748 however exceeds the -3's performance in certain key areas too. I would think that if an operator switches from a 748 to a -3 it's because the contract/job/operating environment dictated it and would be step forward in that sense, especialy if it is a PT-6 powered one.

..but the -3 is still my favorite. Especially the R1830 flavored ones.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:17 pm

Yeh, each has it's own niche for different kinds of flying.

I did some time on the DC3 and thought it was quite versatile, sort of like a big Super Cub with two engines.

Baby Waboose · Post by **Baby Waboose** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:17 pm

No Cat, I didn't work for Austins, one of the other two mentioned. Though I'm sure Jack Austin will spin in his grave if he heard Hawkers being replaced by DC3s.

I hear you that the DC3 is a great versatile airplane, if I could I'd buy one just for fun.

The kid that posted this topic though said he saw one parked at Wasaya's hangar, leading us all to believe Wasaya may be considering replacing their Hawkers with DC3s.

All I'm saying is that for the kind of work Wasaya does (no esker stuff, or snow) the DC3 will not replace a Hawker. I'm sure I speak for the higher ups at the North West Company by saying that hand bombing is not good. The more freight (especially groceries) are handled the more likely it is to get broken. Properly using a forklift is the way to go.

photoguy · Post by **photoguy** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:18 pm

Our company I used to work for did extensive research into the Basler airplanes, we were looking at buying them.

The 10,000 ft payload that they quote on the site is on a fairly short trip length. Our stage length was about 225 miles, and the airplane would only take about 8500 lbs comfortably.

The cost of the airplane was far too great to justify for our operation. You could buy 10 DC-3's for the $5 million price tag of 1 Basler. The 1830 can be overhauled for about $30,000 to $50,000 depending on where you send it vs about $150,000 to $250,000 for a PT6.

The original piston engined DC-3 is not required to meet balanced field length or net climb gradient performance. I am not sure how the reg's apply to the new Basler, but the original DC-3 was not required to meet Balanced Field Length or Net Climb Gradient.

I'm not disputing that its a great airplane, and a good "life preserver" for the airplane that modernized air transportation, and turned it into what we know today... But for an operator that doesn't have a bankroll to float the initial purchase price, its a little too far out of reach.

JigglyBus · Post by **JigglyBus** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:24 pm

Baby Waboose,

Why will, as you say " A DC3 will never pull 10000 pounds off a 3500 foot strip"??

I was just at the Basler site, it's say useful load is 13,000lbs. Couple pilots, 2500lbs of fuel, and seems you have 10,000 left.

I have no first hand knowledge of this, but on paper it looks possible.....?

http://www.baslerturbo.com/performance.html

-editted... someone beat me to it.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:25 pm

" The 1830 can be overhauled for about $30,000 to $50,000 "

We had to buy one last year and the best price we found was $70,000.00 USD for a zero time no exchange.

Everything is getting out of sight pricewise.
------------------------------------------------------------

Are pilots safer now that those experts in TC feel that balanced field length for northern operationsis is the way to go?

I was one of the very lucky few who managed to stay alive and never wrecked one and I sincerely believe that it was by devine intervention, as God did not want me to die and go to hell and corrupt everyone else there.

Cat

photoguy · Post by **photoguy** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:44 pm

That's a really good price.

The 30 to 50 thousand was sending in a couple of fairly decent cores with the engine, so we did get the core discount.

And the company I worked for was not into getting the "gold class" overhaul.