This is the Skymaster C337H at McLeland Field.
Sorry about the Airfield...It is waiting for new Terminal Buildings.
The video runs for four and a half minutes and is best viewed with the Quality clicked up to 1080p and the Full Screen icon at bottom right corner clicked.
It's an ugly little beast, isn't it? But it looks very agile and handles well. It's a nice video with some interesting flying in it. And it gives us a good idea of how the rebuilding is going. It's starting to look like a proper airfield again and I expect the local wildlife has had a rude awakening, too
Considering how much of the fuselage is taken up by engines, there doesn't appear to be much extra room inside. Is the design for short runway performance? For conventional routes, the Caravan would seem to be more practical.
Well it just appealed to me with its twin boom design and two engines without any swing if one fails. The brakes seem a bit on the weak side and I really wouldn't like to try it into a small place...The take-off is short enough but I have yet to turn off a landing run, abeam the tower! I have to say that I like flying it though
Dear me, a push me pull you . I used to fly one now and again in the 70s , and a very noisy beast it was ( banned from most UK fields now as a result ) . I rather lost confidence after a colleague had the rear prop run away in it , with the engine reaching something like 4000 rpm ( or more ) . Had the root of a blade given way it would probably have taken the boom out . In answer to Garry's question there was a Robertson STOL version, but I never flew it
The 337 played a key role in the film Bat 21 about an Elint mission over N Vietnam that is shot down by a Sam 2. Stars Gene Hackman and Danny Glover, well worth a watch as it is very accurate re jamming and shooting down of the EB66. (First time I have heard a Sam 2 on a film, it sounds like a rattlesnake on the RWR).
The aircraft in Bat 21 (both real and film) is not exactly a 337. It is an O-2A. There are several structural differences and a different powerplant. Cessna only confused matters by making the construction numbers starting with "337M", but the FAA considers them to be 2 different aircraft. The O-2B's were converted civilian aircraft. I was given a thorough tongue lashing by the operator of this airplane for getting them messed up - http://www.warbirdregistry.org/o2regist ... 21383.html
I did consider changing 337 for O-2 but thought I might get away with it..................................... 