Fairchild Club Forum

'Hi Folks,

I am comtemplating the purchase of a nice Ranger powered F-24 which
is reportedly in very good condition. I know very little about this
airplane other than it sure makes my heart pitter-patter when I see
them in the pattern at Sun n' Fun or Oshkosh. Call me nuts.

You could say I'm a sure fire candidate for getting in way over my
head, so I'd appreciate a few comments from the group to answer some
very basic questions. I hope to see the airplane in two weeks, so the
more I know the better:

1. How difficult is it to get an A&P to work on an F-24 who is only
familiar with more common Rag and tube planes? Are there any items on
the plane that I should only take it to someone who really knows the
type? Are there any good shops in the Florida/Georgia area that know
Fairchilds and/or ranger engines well?

2. What areas of the Ranger engine should I be concerned about, if
any? Is it pretty reliable when properly maintained? Are engine parts
more or less difficult to find, compared to a Warner powered F-24?

3. Are there are any commonly replaced items on the engine or
airframe that are really hard to find?

4. Compared to more common antique cabin class aircraft such as
Stinson 108s, is there a huge difference in maintenance and operating
costs? My assumption is that an F-24 would be somwhat more expensive
to operate and maintain than a 108, but somewhat less than a Stinson
SR-7 reliant and far less than a Staggerwing. I know this is heavily
affected by use/abuse and a bit of luck, but am I in the ballpark?

5. Lastly, are there any issues involving handling or performance
that I should know about. I am presuming that someone reasonably
competent in a Cubs/Luscombes/Stearmans would be OK in this aircraft,
but if it is a handful in a crosswind due to lack of control
authority or whatever, please let me know.

Sorry to dump so many questions on the group, but I'd appreciate some
help from people who aren't connected with this particular aircraft
prior to meeting its current owner. This aircraft should go to
someone who can and will keep it properly preserved for future
generations, and I'm just trying to determine how well I might fill
those shoes.

Thank you very much,

John'

'Hi John (LeBlanc?)

Good luck on your pursuit of a Fairchild 24. They are wonderful
airplanes and quite affordable when you compare them to the 'big
boys' (Staggerwing, SR-7 Reliant, Waco Cabins, and Howards), but they
do not look out of place when parked next to them.

To answer some of your questions:

#5 handling -- The 24 is very docile. Anyone who is comfortable
in a Cub or Luscomb or Champ will not have any problem with a
Fairchild 24. It heavier and falls faster, but is steadier in rough
winds. I would suggest landing on the grass for the first few
times. The 24 has a very large rudder and it provides good
authority. Crosswind landings are easy, especially on grass.

#4 Maintenance and Operation -- you are in the ballpark. Probably
a bit more than a Stinson 108. The big exception is oil
consumption. All rangers consume about one to two quarts per hour.
Sounds scary, but you learn to live with it. I use a little less
than a quart if I keep RPM and MP down; I use two quarts if I run
hard.

#3 Engine parts are relatively plentiful. You have to network to
find the people who have the parts or know who has them.

#2 Compared to Warners, Rangers are REALLY easy to get parts for.
Routine parts are not a problem. Ranger cowlings seem to be getting
scarce. Fortunately, it is a pretty simple cowl. The Ranger is VERY
reliable.

#1 A&P to work on it -- I have always had a good A&P. Even with
that, I am the person that knows the most about my Fairchild. I
cannot conceive of having someone else being that most knowledgeable
person. I would be afraid of losing them. I suggest that you accept
the fact that YOU are going to have to be that 'most knowledgeable'
person. Someone else can do the work, but you should be more
knowledgeable about the airplane than they are (unless you found a
really good A&P who is already maintaining one or two Fairchild 24s.

There are few 'special' things about a Fairchild 24. The most
important one is that the landing gear bolts 'could' shear, and you
might not notice it. At least once per year (and after any hard
landing), you should turn each bolt while looking to see if the
corresponding nut turns too. The gear is very forgiving, but can be
abused with side loads.

Good luck on your search. If you get to become the 'caretaker' of a
Fairchild 24, be sure to join the Fairchild Club and purchase some
past issues of the Fairchild Flyer.

Bob Waldron
1939 Fairchild 24 K
Sky Harbor airpark Webster, MN

--- In fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> I am comtemplating the purchase of a nice Ranger powered F-24 which
> is reportedly in very good condition. I know very little about this
> airplane other than it sure makes my heart pitter-patter when I see
> them in the pattern at Sun n' Fun or Oshkosh. Call me nuts.
>
> You could say I'm a sure fire candidate for getting in way over my
> head, so I'd appreciate a few comments from the group to answer
some
> very basic questions. I hope to see the airplane in two weeks, so
the
> more I know the better:
>
> 1. How difficult is it to get an A&P to work on an F-24 who is only
> familiar with more common Rag and tube planes? Are there any items
on
> the plane that I should only take it to someone who really knows
the
> type? Are there any good shops in the Florida/Georgia area that
know
> Fairchilds and/or ranger engines well?
>
> 2. What areas of the Ranger engine should I be concerned about, if
> any? Is it pretty reliable when properly maintained? Are engine
parts
> more or less difficult to find, compared to a Warner powered F-24?
>
> 3. Are there are any commonly replaced items on the engine or
> airframe that are really hard to find?
>
> 4. Compared to more common antique cabin class aircraft such as
> Stinson 108s, is there a huge difference in maintenance and
operating
> costs? My assumption is that an F-24 would be somwhat more
expensive
> to operate and maintain than a 108, but somewhat less than a
Stinson
> SR-7 reliant and far less than a Staggerwing. I know this is
heavily
> affected by use/abuse and a bit of luck, but am I in the ballpark?
>
> 5. Lastly, are there any issues involving handling or performance
> that I should know about. I am presuming that someone reasonably
> competent in a Cubs/Luscombes/Stearmans would be OK in this
aircraft,
> but if it is a handful in a crosswind due to lack of control
> authority or whatever, please let me know.
>
> Sorry to dump so many questions on the group, but I'd appreciate
some
> help from people who aren't connected with this particular aircraft
> prior to meeting its current owner. This aircraft should go to
> someone who can and will keep it properly preserved for future
> generations, and I'm just trying to determine how well I might fill
> those shoes.
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> John
>

'