Back yard tankbuster aircraft programme
Discussion
Does any one remember a TV programme - I'm pretty sure it was on Channel 4., maybe in the Equinox series - transmitted around 20 years ago about a bloke and his mate making a tankbuster aeroplane in the USA ?
He was one of those slightly mad self-taught engineers who was actually building the plane as a low cost ultra robust aircraft to compete for a USAF contract. The programme ended with him actually getting it airborne and decidding to scrap it and go for a mark 2 version - much to the horror of his long suffering mate!
I've tried searching for it online but as it was transmitted in the pre-internet days I can't find a trace.
He was one of those slightly mad self-taught engineers who was actually building the plane as a low cost ultra robust aircraft to compete for a USAF contract. The programme ended with him actually getting it airborne and decidding to scrap it and go for a mark 2 version - much to the horror of his long suffering mate!
I've tried searching for it online but as it was transmitted in the pre-internet days I can't find a trace.
I think you are talking about Bob Diemert, a Canadian building a small aircraft to save the Candian Air Force buying F18's...
http://www.nfb.ca/film/defender/
http://www.nfb.ca/film/defender/
Edited by Mr_B on Saturday 30th March 19:58
Edited by Mr_B on Sunday 31st March 16:52
Mr_B said:
I think you are talking about Bob Diemert, a Canadian building a small aircraft to save the Candian Air Force buting F18's...
http://www.nfb.ca/film/defender/
That find, Sir, is excellent. http://www.nfb.ca/film/defender/
Edited by Mr_B on Saturday 30th March 19:58
An interesting comment on another forum. No idea how accurate it is.
The footage on http://www.nfb.ca/film/defender/ is more watchable than the YouTube footage, it doesn't keep stopping.
I watched the film again last night and it looks as if it was the wing of the Cessna that you see outside the hangar in the opening sequence. The other clue is that it's the only part of the aeroplane that's painted. It's difficult to take any of the Defender concept seriously, it's probably better that it didn't manage to fly. The wing testing sequences had to be a spoof, strapping an aerofoil to the back of a truck and driving down a cart track doesn't qualify as "testing to the very limits of the aerodynamic envelope" (at 70 IAS).
I also trawled back through the Diemert threads on WIX and the reports of the standard of work on his "restorations" are alarming. It looks as if the Hurricane was the only aeroplane he did a good job on by all accounts.
If you do a search for "Diemert" on WIX you'll find accounts of: PVC leading edges; lots of bondo with rivet heads stuck in to give the impression of solid structure (where there should have been solid structure); masking tape used for rivet shims; galvanised fence post material used for stub axles; a "sabotaged" engine supplied by Bob that was shagged before he fired it up and various hacked up T6 parts incorporated into Zeros and a P40.
All in all, he extracted substantial funds from the CAF for a very poorly built aeroplane that required a lot of further funding and when they eventually checked the wing spar repair it was grounded for good, requiring over $100k to fix that alone. It's no small wonder that Transport Canada refused a CofA (He didn't even bother with the formality of a CofA when he ferried the VAL).
Looking at photos of the Zero wrecks he recovered on Pacific Wrecks the fuselages at least weren't in bad shape, I guess we should be thankful that he at least saved them before butchering them.
When you mention Bob having a great deal of luck, that's fine when it's just his own neck, but it's a different matter when others are flying the aeroplanes he built. Perhaps in the pioneer era this maverick bodging approach would have been more acceptable or perhaps wooden structures wouldn't have been as forgiving to Bob's bodging? Whilst it's fine being able to think outside the box, that doesn't include knowingly breaking safety standards.
One of Bob's catchphrases that sticks in the mind: "It was a great idea, it just didn't work".
On the other hand, Chris Ball's cars were great.
The footage on http://www.nfb.ca/film/defender/ is more watchable than the YouTube footage, it doesn't keep stopping.
I watched the film again last night and it looks as if it was the wing of the Cessna that you see outside the hangar in the opening sequence. The other clue is that it's the only part of the aeroplane that's painted. It's difficult to take any of the Defender concept seriously, it's probably better that it didn't manage to fly. The wing testing sequences had to be a spoof, strapping an aerofoil to the back of a truck and driving down a cart track doesn't qualify as "testing to the very limits of the aerodynamic envelope" (at 70 IAS).
I also trawled back through the Diemert threads on WIX and the reports of the standard of work on his "restorations" are alarming. It looks as if the Hurricane was the only aeroplane he did a good job on by all accounts.
If you do a search for "Diemert" on WIX you'll find accounts of: PVC leading edges; lots of bondo with rivet heads stuck in to give the impression of solid structure (where there should have been solid structure); masking tape used for rivet shims; galvanised fence post material used for stub axles; a "sabotaged" engine supplied by Bob that was shagged before he fired it up and various hacked up T6 parts incorporated into Zeros and a P40.
All in all, he extracted substantial funds from the CAF for a very poorly built aeroplane that required a lot of further funding and when they eventually checked the wing spar repair it was grounded for good, requiring over $100k to fix that alone. It's no small wonder that Transport Canada refused a CofA (He didn't even bother with the formality of a CofA when he ferried the VAL).
Looking at photos of the Zero wrecks he recovered on Pacific Wrecks the fuselages at least weren't in bad shape, I guess we should be thankful that he at least saved them before butchering them.
When you mention Bob having a great deal of luck, that's fine when it's just his own neck, but it's a different matter when others are flying the aeroplanes he built. Perhaps in the pioneer era this maverick bodging approach would have been more acceptable or perhaps wooden structures wouldn't have been as forgiving to Bob's bodging? Whilst it's fine being able to think outside the box, that doesn't include knowingly breaking safety standards.
One of Bob's catchphrases that sticks in the mind: "It was a great idea, it just didn't work".
On the other hand, Chris Ball's cars were great.
iiyama said:
Wow! Is he for real or was that whole program a spoof? I didn't know if I should laugh or cry at the end when he's talking about a permanently inflated air bag to save the pilot if he/she should fly into a mountain......
ETA Ive just realised the date....Have I been had? LOL!iiyama said:
iiyama said:
Wow! Is he for real or was that whole program a spoof? I didn't know if I should laugh or cry at the end when he's talking about a permanently inflated air bag to save the pilot if he/she should fly into a mountain......
ETA Ive just realised the date....Have I been had? LOL!Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff