Alaska Air Fuel
Thread Starter
Alaska Air Fuel
Guys - I read the sad news about the Alaska Air Fuel DC4 crash, and it prompted a question that's been bubbling around my head ever since I watched some TV programmes about operators in Alaska who were using old airframes. I didn't want to drift the thread in the Accidents Forum so I'm asking here, feel free to move this to somewhere more appropriate.
Why do these guys operate these old aeroplanes? I'm not criticising, I like to see old classic machinery still being used, but I'm wondering about the rationale behind operating them. I'm sure there are more modern machines which could also fill the role, so is there a reason beyond nostalgia/affection (which are good reasons anyway)?
Why do these guys operate these old aeroplanes? I'm not criticising, I like to see old classic machinery still being used, but I'm wondering about the rationale behind operating them. I'm sure there are more modern machines which could also fill the role, so is there a reason beyond nostalgia/affection (which are good reasons anyway)?
Guys - I read the sad news about the Alaska Air Fuel DC4 crash, and it prompted a question that's been bubbling around my head ever since I watched some TV programmes about operators in Alaska who were using old airframes. I didn't want to drift the thread in the Accidents Forum so I'm asking here, feel free to move this to somewhere more appropriate.
Why do these guys operate these old aeroplanes? I'm not criticising, I like to see old classic machinery still being used, but I'm wondering about the rationale behind operating them. I'm sure there are more modern machines which could also fill the role, so is there a reason beyond nostalgia/affection (which are good reasons anyway)?
Why do these guys operate these old aeroplanes? I'm not criticising, I like to see old classic machinery still being used, but I'm wondering about the rationale behind operating them. I'm sure there are more modern machines which could also fill the role, so is there a reason beyond nostalgia/affection (which are good reasons anyway)?
That's it - the problem is the nature of the unprepared strips in the remote communities. There are aren't that many types that can take the quantities required into the rough strips. Probably only the Herc or oddball types like the Transall. Different magnitude of cost.
Thread Starter
Thanks, understand the rough nature they need to operate in, but is it seriously cheaper to operate frames like DC4 etc? I would've thought the maintenance on these would be significantly harder than a more modern aircraft. I'm thinking turbofan rather than radial engines etc. I stand to be educated.....
well - there are people who can keep old airframes going and they're often in the corners of the modern world. It's the up front cost that keeps people flying the old stuff - you can buy one
and capacity - a DC4 will lift over 5 tons of cargo and still have a range of over 2000 miles
and capacity - a DC4 will lift over 5 tons of cargo and still have a range of over 2000 miles
Thumbing through an old copy of Propliner (2022) and Alaska Air Fuel's N3054V is quoted as having been damaged. The article mentions "the tail of N6816D had been shipped to Alaska to repair damaged Skymaster N3054V). Does anyone have any knowledge as to what the earlier accident entailed?
