DHC-4 Caribou

[jetsam]

Hello,
is any active DHC-4 in Canada? Maybe for sale?
cheers
J.

[Ballsssssss]

Ever heard of the TC aircraft register database? http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/activepage ... search.asp

[Liquid Charlie]

who would ever want to buy one of those death traps

[Rudder Bug]

A death trap??? Can you please explain as I've never heard of anything wrong about that aircraft?

[North Shore]

Try here:http://www.penturbo.com/ they are trying to put turbines on them..

[Liquid Charlie]

A death trap??? Can you please explain as I've never heard of anything wrong about that aircraft?

And I have never heard anything "right" about that aircraft -- R-2000 -- worst radial engine ever made -- wheels falling off -- fires -- brake fires -- name it and it will go wrong (Ptarmigan tried to operate one) -- was not one of DH's winning airplanes for sure -- oh ya -- won't maintain on one engine --

[Doc]

Wouldn't touch an R2000 with a stick. There's a reason DC4's have four engines!

[jetsam]

www searching:
2007 - Caribou 225.000 $

[young grasshopper]

name it and it will go wrong (Ptarmigan tried to operate one)

I think it was Air Tindi that operated it as C-GVYZ (1995-ish to 1997).

[Liquid Charlie]

Indeed -- I think you are correct

[fogghorn]

name it and it will go wrong (Ptarmigan tried to operate one)

I think it was Air Tindi that operated it as C-GVYZ (1995-ish to 1997).

Ah yess grasshopper - you are very correct. i believe said aircraft is still in Yellowknife. They screwed up the attachment point where the main gear pivots under the wheel well at its main attachment. That was either on takeoff or maybe xwind landing from some strip up there, and on return to yzf couldnt get the gear down. After much screwing around they got the gear down doing high g pull-ups and parked the thing and to my knowledge it has not flown again. Can't really blame the airplane for that, and they are a hell of a performer and if you look after the engines they are not that bad. Get some rammy jackass turbine jockey on em and look out though. Just ask uncle bob, he knows all about how to screw up engines on a -4, or the whole airplane for that matter as he landed that same plane gear up at an undisclosed location .

[CLguy]

Saw the turbine version do a demo at Oshkosh a few years back and it was very impressive! Also sat in Yellowknife for 8 days some years back and watched Air Tindi try and get a trip done in the piston Caribou. Got as far as the runway pretty much everyday before taxiing back and managed to get airborne once but was back within a few minutes and sat the rest of the day with the cowlings off the left engine.

[fogghorn]

I think all this R-2000 talk is academic, you can't find enough 100/130 to fly the thing anywhere, nor can you find a mechanic who will ride jump seat to every hell hole in the third world (read Canadian Arctic) and keep the engines running. I would think if a -4 is ever gonna fly again commercially it will be with turbine power. That would be a helluva machine.

[Rudder Bug]

Deleted for being too stupid for kilpicki. After all, DC-4's aren't powered with turbines but R-2000!

[Donald]

Why not just get a real airplane...

[kilpicki]

You wouldn.t want to be paying the fuell bill for a -4T

How can this be a lot different from any other ac with a pair of -67s B1900, Basler DC3T

sheez what a stupid statement.

[Liquid Charlie]

Yes a real airplane --- lmfaooooooo

[Donald]

LC: In the context of the discussion, ie turbining a -4, the -5 is relevant. Besides, unlike the c-130, it does not require 5000X100 for full loads.

I guess in your world, this would be the only "real" cargo hauler?

[just curious]

Nope in LC's world, the Nordyne was the real hauler.

[Liquid Charlie]

very true

[Chemtech]

Donald wrote

Why not just get a real airplane...



Image

Can they still get parts for those engines?

[Blakey]

LC: In the context of the discussion, ie turbining a -4, the -5 is relevant. Besides, unlike the c-130, it does not require 5000X100 for full loads.

For a full -5 load? The 130 will do that off 2800'! And if you want to talk about the load you can carry through the rocks, the 130 just blows the -5 away. Now, fuel burn per ton mile and total fuel burn we don't talk about quite so loudly!

[pelmet]

As far as I know, the Australian Air force is quite happy with their Caribou's with no replacement due for now.

Count on 3800 feet of runway for an empty C-130, maybe slightly less.

[jetsam]

http://www.raaf.gov.au/aircraft/caribou.htm

look at the engines specifications: they don`t know what R-2000 power is?

[kimflora]

The Caribou was and still is a GREAT flying machine. The R-2000 was a good reliable engine. The Australian Air Force still proves that today. It will perform quite nicely on 1 engine and also with a load. Like any aircraft it takes proper maintenance to keep it airworthy. I was a Caribou Crew Chief (US ARMY) in Vietnam 45 years ago. It was always hot and nasty in Vietnam but the Caribou was perfect for the job. We did things with the Caribou that no other a/c in service at that time could have done. de Havilland builds GREAT airplanes.
Check the link below to find out more about this outstanding flying machine.
http://www.dhc4and5.org/
BTW
The P&W R2000 has 1450 HP.
Kim