Fairchild Club Forum

'Tired of paying property taxes income taxes?

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_672273_Truly+a+Sportsman%27s+Paradise+.html

Yes Dan This is me Tom D.'

'New to the group, so please excuse all old & new mistakes, misconceptions
and downright ignorance?!

So, contemplating a 24W but the Warners are now such highly collectible
gems - beyond my financial reasoning. Also, need a dependable engine,
easier to service, maintain, etc. So, any experiences with the STC'd
re-engines? The Continental 220 or the Jacobs? There is an airplane on
Ebay with the STC'd Continental, any thoughts? Has anyone flown one of
these?Thanks, Joe Philips'

'Hi Joe ...
 
I have a 1946 24W-46 with a Jacobs 755B2 (275HP) ... I love it but it's not for everyone. Performance it pretty remarkable and it sure looks good. Google N4263S and there is a local Atlanta photgrapher's site with a few good shots. Biggest problem with the Jake conversion is that the mounts (STC) are no longer available (serv-aero) and the conversion would be difficult to get throught the FAA now if started from scratch. A very long and arduous process. I believe the Continental mount was also provided by serv-aero. There are a few other members with converted ships and a few others considering some form of conversion. I would expect to receive some feedback from the group. You might be better off trying to buy something already flying. My bird might even be available for the right price. Best of luck.
 
Matt
N4263S

--- On Fri, 6/15/12, Joe Philips wrote:


From: Joe Philips
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates
To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 2:45 PM


New to the group, so please excuse all old & new mistakes, misconceptions
and downright ignorance?!

So, contemplating a 24W but the Warners are now such highly collectible
gems - beyond my financial reasoning. Also, need a dependable engine,
easier to service, maintain, etc.  So, any experiences with the STC'd
re-engines?  The Continental 220 or the Jacobs?  There is an airplane on
Ebay with the STC'd Continental, any thoughts?  Has anyone flown one of
these?Thanks, Joe Philips






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

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

'

'Hi Joe,
I don't have a Fairchild 24 but I do have a plane with a Warner 165 engine. My advice on your buying decision would be to separate out the cost of owning/maintaining an antique airplane vs. the engine type.
If you have a radial (or for that matter a Ranger) powered airplane it will be more difficult and more expensive to keep it flying. That's just a fact of life - fewer mechanics with expertise, fewer vendors who will overhaul accessories, fewer engine parts overhaul shops who'll have the willingness to work on cylinders, etc. I think this is basically a constant issue across both Warners and the Stearman engines of Continental 220s and Jakes.
So I assume you like the Fairchild 24 and like the radial mystique - which many of us on this list certainly do, and you're willing to accept the downsides that come with the mystique.
Then I think you look at the engine type.
Warner 145 powered airplane - these are good engines if they're reliably kept greased, but parts are becoming an issue. So for the 145 I agree an alternative engine might be worth looking at.
For a Warner 165 - actually a highly reliable engine in my experience, as reliable as a Continental or Jake. I fly mine >75 hrs/year over long cross country trips. Parts availability is no problem for a 165. I think the only downside is that there are a few (very few) more engine overhaul shops that are familiar with the 220 Continental than a Warner if you don't do your own work.
Overall my view is that on reliability and degree of difficulty in maintaining, a Continental 220 or Jake is equivalent to the Warner. Each engine has its quirks but I've seen basically identical problem frequencies and hassle factor across the three types.
If you buy that, then I think you need to evaluate what you're looking for in an airplane and the pros/cons of each engine type:
Warner 165 powered airplanePro: originality in fit & look, preserves original weight & load capacityCon: Climb performance is original level performance, which is to say not exciting.
Continental 220 or Jake powered airplanePro: Climb performance goes up a lot - could be a really big win especially if you do a lot of high/hot.Con: Weight, capacity decreases if you stay legal. Non-standard installation, make sure it was done right the first time before you buy. Difficulty of new conversions with the modern FAA. I personally think the big-engined Fairchild 24 conversions aren't very pretty, but that's obviously a matter of opinion, and the big engine look might be a pro in your book.
Lastly, I would advise test-flying both to see if the increased weight of a big-engine conversion adversely affects the flying qualities that you care about. Since each conversion is a bit different I suspect each of the converted airplanes are going to fly uniquely and may or may not have qualities that you like.
-Russell'38 Ryan SC-W with Warner 165, '41 Cessna Airmaster with Warner 165
To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
From: flyingbanks@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:56:29 -0700
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates


























Hi Joe ...



I have a 1946 24W-46 with a Jacobs 755B2 (275HP) ... I love it but it's not for everyone. Performance it pretty remarkable and it sure looks good. Google N4263S and there is a local Atlanta photgrapher's site with a few good shots. Biggest problem with the Jake conversion is that the mounts (STC) are no longer available (serv-aero) and the conversion would be difficult to get throught the FAA now if started from scratch. A very long and arduous process. I believe the Continental mount was also provided by serv-aero. There are a few other members with converted ships and a few others considering some form of conversion. I would expect to receive some feedback from the group. You might be better off trying to buy something already flying. My bird might even be available for the right price. Best of luck.



Matt

N4263S

--- On Fri, 6/15/12, Joe Philips wrote:



From: Joe Philips

Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates

To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com

Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 2:45 PM



New to the group, so please excuse all old & new mistakes, misconceptions

and downright ignorance?!



So, contemplating a 24W but the Warners are now such highly collectible

gems - beyond my financial reasoning. Also, need a dependable engine,

easier to service, maintain, etc. So, any experiences with the STC'd

re-engines? The Continental 220 or the Jacobs? There is an airplane on

Ebay with the STC'd Continental, any thoughts? Has anyone flown one of

these?Thanks, Joe Philips



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



Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

'

'Joe,
Looks like you have received some valuable advice so far.  I have not had any experience with Cont. or Jakes. I have had two 1946 24W-46 birds since 1998. Still have one.  Both were very original with the 165 Warner.  One item not mentioned in any replay so far is the prop installation.  I have flown 24's with 165's having wood, metal and AeroMatic props.  The best by far (say 10-12 mph faster) is the AeroMatic.  The next best is a Curtiss Reed metal.  The most lethargic is the wood.  In fact after flying with the Curtiss for many hours and then trying a wood prop on the same airplane, I was actually concerned that it may not attain take-off speed on a 2,800' runway!  It finally did and climbed out ok.  Once at cruise, I thought the Curtiss and wood performed about the same.
The AeroMatic appears to have it's own concerns with dificullty finding good blades and haveing them repaired or overhauled. 
I am not a mechanical person and therefore would never attempt a restoration of such a bird.  My experience leads me to the conclusion that the best value is to purchase a good bird in flying condition.  To each his own.

Roger Starr
NC77630



From: Joe Philips
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates
To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 11:45 AM



 



New to the group, so please excuse all old & new mistakes, misconceptions
and downright ignorance?!

So, contemplating a 24W but the Warners are now such highly collectible
gems - beyond my financial reasoning. Also, need a dependable engine,
easier to service, maintain, etc. So, any experiences with the STC'd
re-engines? The Continental 220 or the Jacobs? There is an airplane on
EBay with the STC'd Continental, any thoughts? Has anyone flown one of
these?Thanks, Joe Philips








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]'

'On 6/16/2012 6:33 PM, Ellen Starr wrote:

>
> Joe,
> Looks like you have received some valuable advice so far. I have not
> had any experience with Cont. or Jakes. I have had two 1946 24W-46
> birds since 1998. Still have one. Both were very original with the
> 165 Warner. One item not mentioned in any replay so far is the prop
> installation. I have flown 24's with 165's having wood, metal and
> AeroMatic props. The best by far (say 10-12 mph faster) is the
> AeroMatic. The next best is a Curtiss Reed metal. The most lethargic
> is the wood. In fact after flying with the Curtiss for many hours and
> then trying a wood prop on the same airplane, I was actually concerned
> that it may not attain take-off speed on a 2,800' runway! It finally
> did and climbed out ok. Once at cruise, I thought the Curtiss and
> wood performed about the same.
> The AeroMatic appears to have it's own concerns with dificullty
> finding good blades and haveing them repaired or overhauled.
> I am not a mechanical person and therefore would never attempt a
> restoration of such a bird. My experience leads me to the conclusion
> that the best value is to purchase a good bird in flying condition.
> To each his own.
>
>

Kent Tarver has the TC for AeroMatics and can overhaul them and
provide new blades.

Craig C.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]'

'Joe-
I purchased N7781 around a month and a half ago, it has the Continental STC. So far I have been very happy with the 220 and appreciate having the extra power, I believe the bird needs the extra power. My operations are out of 2760' grass strip and appreciate the Continental every time I fly.


________________________________
From: Joe Philips
To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates


 
New to the group, so please excuse all old & new mistakes, misconceptions
and downright ignorance?!

So, contemplating a 24W but the Warners are now such highly collectible
gems - beyond my financial reasoning. Also, need a dependable engine,
easier to service, maintain, etc. So, any experiences with the STC'd
re-engines? The Continental 220 or the Jacobs? There is an airplane on
Ebay with the STC'd Continental, any thoughts? Has anyone flown one of
these?Thanks, Joe Philips




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]'

'I am currently running a cruise sensenich on N77681 with the Cont 220 conversion. I would definately not operate the bird out of anthing shorter than a 2700' strip on a summer day with the tanks topped. The bird performs very incredibly with just me in it, when I start adding passengers the take-off performance goes out the roll down window in a hurry. 681 came with two Beech Props, they are being inspected and I hope to have one on by next week. Will report what I find.


________________________________
From: Ellen Starr
To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates


 
Joe,
Looks like you have received some valuable advice so far.  I have not had any experience with Cont. or Jakes. I have had two 1946 24W-46 birds since 1998. Still have one.  Both were very original with the 165 Warner.  One item not mentioned in any replay so far is the prop installation.  I have flown 24's with 165's having wood, metal and AeroMatic props.  The best by far (say 10-12 mph faster) is the AeroMatic.  The next best is a Curtiss Reed metal.  The most lethargic is the wood.  In fact after flying with the Curtiss for many hours and then trying a wood prop on the same airplane, I was actually concerned that it may not attain take-off speed on a 2,800' runway!  It finally did and climbed out ok.  Once at cruise, I thought the Curtiss and wood performed about the same.
The AeroMatic appears to have it's own concerns with dificullty finding good blades and haveing them repaired or overhauled. 
I am not a mechanical person and therefore would never attempt a restoration of such a bird.  My experience leads me to the conclusion that the best value is to purchase a good bird in flying condition.  To each his own.

Roger Starr
NC77630

From: Joe Philips
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] 24W's with STC'd engine alternates
To: fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 11:45 AM

 

New to the group, so please excuse all old & new mistakes, misconceptions
and downright ignorance?!

So, contemplating a 24W but the Warners are now such highly collectible
gems - beyond my financial reasoning. Also, need a dependable engine,
easier to service, maintain, etc. So, any experiences with the STC'd
re-engines? The Continental 220 or the Jacobs? There is an airplane on
EBay with the STC'd Continental, any thoughts? Has anyone flown one of
these?Thanks, Joe Philips

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]'