The Firearms Forum banner

Any pilots or aviation buffs here? Question about an old C-47.

5K views 23 replies 10 participants last post by  hkruss 
#1 ·
While visiting my hometown last weekend, I drove to the next town over where I remembered many years ago, there used to be several old aircraft on a lot in the middle of the town. One was a B-25, another was a C-47, and I don't recall what the other two were (I know they were not military or I would have remembered what they were!). All but the C-47 were gone. Since the lot had posted signs all over, I could only get to within about 100 feet. I noticed it had the numbers '4009' at the rear of the fuselage near the tail. I could not see a number on the tail.
I'm curious, what would that 4009 represent? Is that the same as a tail number?
I was wondering if there was some way to look up info on this particular aircraft using that number. Maybe date of manufacture or if it is ex-military, where it may have served. I did not see an 'N' charactor on the aircraft, so would that mean it was NOT a civilian plane?

What a shame for such a piece of history to be sitting there all these years instead of being preserved.
Anyway, I know it's a long shot, but I figured it is at least worth asking you guys for help.
Thanks, HK

.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
hkruss - I'd sure like to have seen pictures of those aircraft to give you a more definate answer. I was a professional soldier -Army Aviation - and a Flight Engineer on CH-47 aircraft, and also crewed UH-1 Hueys and H-34s.

If that number represented the tail number, the first two digits of the tail number would represent the year the aircraft was produced. An example would be one of my assigned CH-47 aircraft's tail number was "6815857". That meant that my aircraft was made in 1968 ("68"), with an Army record number of 15857. My aircraft was simply referred to as "8-5-7".

The number you posted looks to be too short to be an Air Force tail number for a C-47. As you correctly stated, that number "4009" is not an FAA assigned aircraft registration number. Locally assinged aircraft numbers are commonly referred to as "Nose Numbers", and those are usually found on the forward section of the aircraft by the forward landing gear on both sides, and those don't always match the Tail Number. I've seen many of those numbers being three and even four digit numbers in my 40+ years working in and around aircraft. I'm thinking that may be a salvage record number rather than a tail number.

A final thought. The information I gave you pertaining to my aircraft's tail number was from the 1960s. It is very possible that the Army Air Corps or the Air Force used a different system in the 1940s and 1950s. I did crew an H-34 that was made in 1954, but not long enough to memorize the tail number.

The Unit I was with in Nam had and aircraft with the final three digits "009". That one was called "Balls Nine", NOT "0-0-9".
 
#5 ·
RJay - only crewed those H-34s for a few months. NOISY beasts!!!! No, never crewed an H-19. Most of my time was CH-47s. Baby C Models in Nam, and A Models stateside. Well less than 100 hours in Hueys.

After Hooks, that H-34 was a trip. Manual blade droop stops and a 12 cylinder radial that ate spark plugs like crazy. Worst part for me was the lack of visibility and that dang exhaust stack right by the cabin door. The noise would have made a stone-deaf man crindge. Mine was made in 1954, so it was newer than me, but not by a whole bunch.
 
#6 · (Edited)
I have to hand it to any Helicopter pilots out there those things are hard to fly.I've flown fixed wing for 25 years and a Hughes-300 once.What a mess, I was all over the sky with that thing.I heard that many of the chopper pilots in Viet-nam were very young.That's pretty awsome to pick up that skill so fast and to be as good as they were.
 
#7 · (Edited)
I have to hand it to any Helicopter pilots out there those things are hard to fly.I've flown fixed wing for 25 years and a Hughes-300 once.What a mess, I was all over the sky with that thing.I heard that many of the chopper pilots in Viet-nam were very young.That's pretty awsome to pick up that skill so fast and to be as good as they were.
I was one of those kids that went through the Army's High School to Flight School flight training program. I was barely 19 when I graduated from Flight School. It was one wild & crazy experience. Learning to fly helicopters is like walking, talking, chewing gum, rubbing your tummy and patting your head all at one time. Every extremity of your body has to perform a task while being perfectly cooridinated with a movement of some other one.

Our Primary Flight Training in those days was in West Texas where we had plenty of room to practice without running in to anything or anybody. It was fairly comical to see a staging field where 25 or 30 new pilots where learning to control their wild beasts all at one time. There were aircraft going in every imaginable direction. :eek: That we survived was a pure miricle, but somehow we figured it out an it became second nature like riding a bicycle. Those instructor pilots had to be a special breed! :eek:

Couldn't have done what we did though without guys like Jim Brady to fix the ones we broke.
 

Attachments

#8 · (Edited)
Snakedriver, Thanks for your service and thank's for sharing the photo.I know war is a serious business and no one can understand what you guys went through unless they were there.But from one pilot to another that had to be such a thrill strapping on a powerful machine like that at such a young age.Those calvary hats are way cool!
 
#9 · (Edited)
Dang, Snakedriver, you look so young in that picture. I was 19 when I was on Flight Status, and the youngest Sp/5 in the Unit, but you looked younger than me! Hard to believe that Uncle Sugar put so much responsibility in the hands of kids like us. (Those 2-piece Nomex were MUCH better than the later issue coveralls they use now) DITTO on the CAV hat. That is cool to the MAX! I was with the "Pukeing Buzzards" and we didn't have anything like the 1st Cav's hats.

The one thing we had was the full-color Division patch. We kept ours after the rest of the Army went to the subdued patches. In the Division, the standing order was "The Eagle will never be subdued".
 
#10 ·
Dang, Snakedriver, you look so young in that picture. I was 19 when I was on Flight Status, and the youngest Sp/5 in the Unit, but you looked younger than me! Hard to believe that Uncle Sugar put so much responsibility in the hands of kids like us. (Those 2-piece Nomex were MUCH better than the later issue coveralls they use now) DITTO on the CAV hat. That is cool to the MAX! I was with the "Pukeing Buzzards" and we didn't have anything like the 1st Cav's hats.

The one thing we had was the full-color Division patch. We kept ours after the rest of the Army went to the subdued patches. In the Division, the standing order was "The Eagle will never be subdued".
That we did it and survived is truely amazing. When my son was 19, I looked at him and couldn't imagine that kids like that were ever asked to bear such a burden of war. It just didn't seem possible.

We had to rearm and refuel our Cobras ourselves, often in remote areas without any support. The tropical Vietnam weather made it mandatory to shuck your shirt during the operation and having the two-piece nomex flight suits made it super easy to do. They were very comfortable, it was like working in your jammies. Note the many pockets jammed with survival gear if I needed to E & E.

HAPPY 4TH OF JULY TO EVERYONE!!!
 
#11 ·
I was with the "Pukeing Buzzards" .
In the Division, the standing order was "The Eagle will never be subdued".
Ouch.... a little respect lad.... :D

I'm just guessing you were not a qualified Paratrooper.
 
#12 · (Edited)
No dis-respect here, Al. Being 101st in combat gives us the right to use that term. And that is ALWAYS said with a grin because we knew we were the best. Of course, if you were not 101st, that term is not allowed. That was the very finest Division that I've either served with or have observed in a whole bunch of years wearing the uniform. If I ever had to go to war again, I'd only pray that it would be in that Division. ALL THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!

Me Jump Qualified? Nope. My hat is off to you and my other friends who wear Paratrooper Wings. My Wings are Aircrewman Wings. Back then you had to have 25 combat hours to rate them. I've trampled the weeds, crawled through them, ducked behind them, flown over lots them, but never deliberately jumped into them from a perfectly operating aircraft on purpose. Did'nt see any point in doing that as long as the guys up front kept peddling....
 
#13 ·
I'll accept that, bro.... :D:D:D... :patriotic:

Happy 4th
 
#14 · (Edited)
#15 ·
Hkruss and Marlin T - That is possible, as the C-47 was developed from the DC3 civilian airliner, at least according to my research. The problem is still the tail or aircraft number painted on the first aircraft described. This one might continue to be a mystery. But with the pictures That Marlin T posted, maybe those ARE the aircraft registration numbers. There is something just before the BOLD last 4 numbers on one of the C-47s, but my ageing eyes can't make out what it may be. That could well be the first digits of the tail number.
 
#16 · (Edited)
Hkruss and Marlin T - That is possible, as the C-47 was developed from the DC3 civilian airliner, at least according to my research. The problem is still the tail or aircraft number painted on the first aircraft described. This one might continue to be a mystery. But with the pictures That Marlin T posted, maybe those ARE the aircraft registration numbers. There is something just before the BOLD last 4 numbers on one of the C-47s, but my ageing eyes can't make out what it may be. That could well be the first digits of the tail number.
I believe they are one in the same.The C-47 is the military version of the DC-3.I have heard old/school pilots from as far back as WWII talk of this plane while in there presence as a search pilot in the "Civil Air Patrol"for 25 years.They all agreed it was one of the best designed and safest planes of all time.Just as I joined the (CAP)they just got rid of a search plane called the (bird dog) left over from Viet-Nam.I missed being checked out in it by just months.They were given to the squadron from the Air-Force.It had a stick and was a tail dragger with a slow airspeed for searching.
 
#17 ·
The C-47 and the commercial DC-3 differ in several ways, big difference is the C-47 used the 14 cylinder (2 row) P&W R1830, while the DC-3 used the 9 cylinder Wright R1820. They made the same amount of power, the B-17 was designed around the R1820 and wartime demands for engine production required the change. The R1830 is smaller diameter and its cowling is more tapered. Much confusion about DC-3s results from the postwar conversion of C-47s into commercial service and calling them DC-3s, I don't believe any DC-3s were made after the war, the prewar commercial DC-3s many were drafted, but those had other designations, not C-47.

It is not all that difficult to fly a helicopter, a learned skill. I got my private helicopter rating at age 73. It seems very difficult for 10-25 hours, depending, but once the coordination comes, it's easy.
 
#18 ·
Gent I used to teach with at a high school told me a story one day concerning a job he had with an aviation company in the 50s that did a fair amount of work converting WWII C47s to civilian aviation use, installing passenger seats in cargo holds and etc.

One day they began work on 6 or so surplus C47s they'd received and when they began drilling holes to install the passenger seats, something they'd done many times, a problem occurred. When they got to the fifth or so row of seats from the cock pit, they missed the brace/beam under the floor the seats would be secured to. Said, they had same problem drilling floor for seats every 4 or so rows. Same problem occured on 2nd C47 of their new batch of planes they installed passenger seats in. This puzzled them and upon investigation figured out the two C47s had a longer fuselage than it should have been. They called Douglas to discuss the problem, essentially wanting to know about this different variation of C47 they'd encountered, wanting its specifications and etc. Douglas told them, what variation?, they'd built only one kind of C47.

Well, one of his co-workers came up with an anwser to these longer fuselaged C47s they had after studying the flight logs that came with the planes they had a problem with. All had been in the same squadron. The flight logs told the entire history of how/where the plane had been used. These longer fuselaged C47s had been used to pull gliders, such as in the D-day invasion of France. They came to the conclusion, pulling a glider litterally had stretched the fusalage enough that when drilling into the cargo floor, the normal spacing they used to hit the beams under floor wasn't reliable.
 
#19 ·
Wanted to update the thread a little.

I have some pic's that I will post. I was having some problems that kept me from posting them originally. Also, turns out this aircraft DOES have the 'N' designator in front of the '4009'. I was going on memory when I started the thread. Didn't remember it at the time, but after reviewing my photo's, then I saw it.
Marlin T, I appreciate you doing the search attempt. I must apologize because I did not specify in the OP, that the aircraft is actually in Mississippi, in the town of Petal (across the river from my hometown of Hattiesburg). Your search was for Alabama, ... my bad. Thanks for the effort though!
Some interesting stories from you guys. I like that kind of thread drift!!! Good stuff.
Let me see if I can get these pic's posted.
 

Attachments

#20 · (Edited)
Another unique Petal attraction is a DC-3 airplane that sits along South Main Street. The plane was purchased by M.W. Hamilton about 20 years ago, disassembled, and trucked to its present location, according to Hamilton's son, M.W. Hamilton, Jr. The elder Hamilton, now deceased, learned to fly small planes with the Key brothers in Meridian in the 1930s; flying buffs will recognize the name, since Al and Fred Keys made a record-breaking non-stop flight of 27 days in 1935. (Their record remains unbroken in conventional flight; only orbiting spacecraft have remained in the air longer.) Hamilton, Sr. went on to become a bit of a collector of military aircraft, acquiring a number of old planes over the years, including a B-25 bomber, C-47, F-9 Cougar fighter jet, and five BT-13 basic trainers, Hamilton, Jr. said. All the other planes are now gone; the B-25 is on display at a water park in Destin, Fla. According to Ruud Leeuw, who operates a website on classic aircraft, the DC-3 plane still parked in Petal was first used by the U.S. Army Air Forces from 1943-1945, then operated with United Airlines until 1955, when it was purchased by IBM. The plane changed hands a few more times before being taken out of operation in 1976. And now it sits in a small Mississippi town, miles from any airport!

http://www.ruudleeuw.com/deepsouth.htm

--------------------------------



Douglas C-53 Skytrooper/42-68745

Serial #: 42-68745
Construction #: 11672
Civil Registration:
NC49543
N705M
N400S
Model:
C-53D
Name: None
Status: Derelict
Last info: 2002

History:
Delivered to USAAF as 42-68745, April 10, 1943.
United Airlines, 1945-1955.
- Registered as NC49543.
- Reported purchased in 1949, possibly leased from Air Force, 1945-1949.
- Flew as "Mainliner New Jersey", 1945-1949.
- Flew as "Mainliner Youngstown", 1949-1955.
IBM Corporation, 1955.
- Registered as N705M.
Freeport Sulfur Co., 19??.
- Registered as N400S.
Pan Air Corporation, New Orleans, LA, 1965.
- Registered as N4003, 1967.
Removed from U.S. Civil Register, 1976.
Unknown Owner, Petal, MS, circa 1976-2002.
- Stored derlict sans engines.
 
#21 ·
NOW that is a great post! Amazing just to see available info on here that goes back so far . thanks for all that you guys, better than a good book and with photos!And to you helo guys thanks for your service. To all who served thanks
 
#22 ·
#23 · (Edited)
BTW, over the 4th of July I got together in Orlando with my Vietnam Helicopter Pilot's Assoc. buddies for our annual reunion. One of the guys that I'm really good friends with trains U. S. Air Force pilots to fly helicopters at Ft. Rucker, AL. While the U.S. Army has retired it's old Hueys now, they consigned a bunch of them over to the Air Force for training. He said it was typical of the Air Force to abbreviate the tail numbers down to just the last four digits. So, 42-12345 would become just 2345 and so on. My buddy said that's how the tail numbers appear now on the old Army Hueys now dressed in U.S. Air Force markings.
 
#24 · (Edited)
Marlin T,
Man, I can't thank you enough for posting that info! That was exactly what I was looking for. Even better, now I know the name of the man who owns it. I plan on trying to contact him to get permission for an up close look.
The info spoke of a Mr. Hamilton Sr. who collected these aircraft. I can remember probably 25 years ago stopping by his shop where the aircraft were located. The old guy came out and we had a nice long talk about the 'planes. He saw that I was truly 'in' to military aircraft and he ended up letting me crawl around in the B-25 which was there at the time. What a thrill for someone like me!
The article also mentioned other aircraft he owned at one time or another. As I mentioned in my OP, there were two other aircraft there the day I met Mr. Hamilton. Maybe they were the F9F and one of the 13's. My memory is a little clouded after 25 years, but I sure thought I would have remembered a Cougar being there! The BT-13, I was not familiar with.
There are several large warehouses on the property, so who knows what may be stored inside of them! If I get permission, I aim to find out. I will let ya'll know if anyone is interested.
As an aside, the link in the info that Marlin T provided mentions Mr. Hamilton's relationship with the Key brothers. The Key brothers are famous in their own right for setting the World endurance record by remaining aloft in a Curtis Robin for close to a month! Something like 650 hours. Think about that..., a month without landing! http://www.theflyingkeybrothers.com/
In the course of my conversation I learned that Mr. Hamilton was part of the ground crew for that epic flight. A little brush with aviation history. Again, what a thrill for an aviation nut like me! That particular aircraft now hangs in the Smithsonian next to the Wright Flyer and The Spirit of St. Louis. Kinda cool, huh?

Again, thanks to Marlin T for the wealth of info!

HK

.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top