Tailspin Turtle

My coauthor (who has died, unfortunately) did most of the Air Force research and I provided all of the Navy stuff. In other words, somebody else needs to chime in with a suggestion about the most representative T-37 color scheme. Sorry.

Not necessarily. That probe on the vertical fin was a static source change. It is not on all AD-4s.

Dana - thanks for stepping in. Was there a mix of white and black for Light Gray?

Thanks - very thoughtful of you.

Thanks - note only one 20 mm cannon per wing. The change to four occurred in production about 100 airplanes after the addition of the cowl flaps inside the cowling but the installation on the airplane on the left looks like a replacement or a retrofit (light colored: zinc chromate?) Also note that the "armor" modification has not been added to the one on the right (kick-in step).

White on gray/white ADs, blue on blue ones. It is fixed in place. The engine does not have to be running for the flaps to be opened. They did open automatically when the engine started but they could then be closed for a quicker warmup.

When the flaps are opened, they aren't easy to see in the gloom inside the cowling. Sometimes the only apparent features are the smooth round "shield" mounted on the gearbox housing and the pin sticking out of the top right forward side of the cowling.

At least some of the AD-4s, certainly BuNo 123880 and subsequent, had the cooling flaps on the inside of the cowl in front of the engine cylinders. I wouldn't be surprised if they were added to earlier AD-4s when they periodically went through overhaul. If my posts state otherwise, please point me to that.

The USAF F-111s didn't have probe refueling capability as far as I know. Two different retractable probes were designed for the Navy's F-111B, both located in front of the windscreen and somewhat complicated given the limited amount of real estate to retract it there (carrier basing required a minimization of its overall length). See https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012/01/f-111b-inflight-refueling-probe.html The F-111K installation shown in the illustration and the picture of the incomplete airframes is more straightforward, no doubt permitted by the longer nose of the USAF F-111 overall length. Thanks to all for the additional detail on the F-111K, some of which I hadn't seen before.

This is a scabbed-on sonobuoy dispenser added to the last USN variant of the S-2. Kinetic provides two but only one is required, on the outboard side of the right nacelle. For more (and also scroll down to the comments for more corrections) see https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2010/08/stoof.html

Yes - flame suppressor or damper. See https://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2013/06/f4u-2-color-scheme.html. Note that these were to minimize its visual signature at night.

Graham: Strictly speaking, the Vmc is only a consideration on takeoff or a waveoff if full power is required on the critical engine. It doesn't come into play when ditching because you've committed to "landing". However, generally the only reason to ditch a twin with one engine inoperative and feathered is if you're out of gas or on fire.

Thanks to David Weeks generous agreement to use crops from his excellent F4U-4 and -4B drawings, I've updated my F4U-4 post to show details of the differences between the upper and lower surfaces of the outboard wing panels: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2014/03/f4u-4-modelers-notes.html

My Corsair kits are in deep storage at the moment and my priority is finishing my last book. However, I was remiss in creating my F4U-4 post without addressing both the upper and lower changes to the outboard wing panel to change from six machine guns to four cannon. The lower surface difference is pretty straight forward with holes that are obvious; the upper surface change is a little more subtle but the panel lines for the ammo boxes and gun bay doors are different as well. I'll see if I can pull something together.

That reminded me to look at my post to check that I'd specifically mentioned the difference in exhaust indentation between the -7 and the -5. I hadn't and now I have: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-last-propeller-pulled-corsairs-f4u.html. I'm pretty sure that the canopies were all the same but I'd be happy to be better informed about that and edit the post accordingly.

Here is a link to a link to a Roden AJ-1 review: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2023/01/roden-172-aj-1-savage-review.html

No and my guess is that it was unique to that unit. Strictly speaking, that was a target tow/control scheme and as far as I know, the bug smasher was never used for either one of those requirements. It seems likely that the unit just repainted the one that they were provided for logistics support to match their JDs.

Here's an interesting video of setting dihedral on a Piper Super Cub, with one method being to measure the dihedral with respect to the lower surface of the wing: https://youtu.be/uUayKl7dhug

Unfortunately, the rigging instructions quoted don't include how the dihedral is measured, although my guess is that it's the upper surface of the wing, probably along a spar. Aerodynamicists prefer it to be defined with respect to the chord line, which is somewhere in between the upper and lower surface of the wing: that's what it generally is when given in specifications. For those who might want to know more about that (you need to scroll down to the A4D dihedral example) or see some deceptive appearance of non-existent dihedral/anhedral in photos and drawings, see https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2014/03/anhedraldihedral-and-wing-sweep.html

Only the student in the front right seat in cabin had the periscope sight. The other student positions, including the one on the flight deck, had only the radar repeater scope.

Yes - more here on that: https://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2012/05/accurate-three-view-drawings.html

The odds are very good that whatever Trumpeter says is there is incorrect. I've updated my TA-3B post with some more illustrations: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2013/09/ta-3b-skywarrior.html

Unless the copy was done by taking a picture, any distortion is likely to be unequal "stretching" of the document by the reproduction and/or printing process. This is easily checked by determining the scale consistency of major dimensions both horizontally and vertically. With respect to the multi-view drawing above, that is easily done even though the dimensions are not shown by comparing the overall length of the top and bottom views. They should be the same.

Note that the left rear seat in the TA-3B cockpit was now facing forward: https://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2013/09/ta-3b-skywarrior.html

https://www.classicwarbirds.co.uk/articles/air-zoo-founder-sue-parish-and-her-pink-p-40-warhawk.php There are more pictures on the web.