.

[fougner]

.

[Willis Nigh]

Nice airplane, but boring video. Are there any mods other than the belly tank? Any increase MTOW?
There are a few 802's with belly tanks and 1000 gal. capacity hauling bulk fuel.

[Ag Driver]

Nice. Even at 4", I wonder how long it takes for a load.

[xsbank]

WAG: 3 minutes.

[nacho]

Isn't a new design altogether ?

[snowshoe]

I believe you're right nacho. that side by side love seat alone would make it a new design... . Seats like that remind me of those crappy farm tractors and combines that some people tried to sell back in the 70/80's. Belarus was the name---- I think.

[Willis Nigh]

The side by side seating would be a squeeze for sure. It makes initial training less scary though . The rest of the time you'll have the room to yourself. Other mods include beefier airframe tubing, along with slightly larger wing and fuselage dimensions over the 802. Engine is the -67F. There is an upgross to 20000 lbs. MTOW. So more retardant plus more room for fuel. The bomber guys will like that.

Can anyone think of any heavier single engine propellor airplanes? The only one I can think is the A-1 Skyraider.

[nacho]

I never liked the idea of side by side on aerial work. If you are training somebody and he /she is right there by your side then the tazer wouldn't be a surprise.
I much rather seat in the back and first warning is a hard hit in on the helmet, second....well, you know...

How is it for visibility if you are on one side ?

[fougner]

.

[wabano]

It's just a fueler with better dump doors.

I guess this time they will use the full size twin otter floats,
the chopped up ones on the 802 are pretty lamentable, not
providing enough flotation.(In case of some failures, you just sink!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYFFHsWrCcc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpFIjYV86cs

I'd say, in that case, just shut down, enough flotation remain to sort of stay above water...
(Fill the compartments with air and you're good to go!)

[bigsky]

It's just a fueler with better dump doors.

I guess this time they will use the full size twin otter floats,
the chopped up ones on the 802 are pretty lamentable, not
providing enough flotation.(In case of some failures, you just sink!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYFFHsWrCcc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpFIjYV86cs

I'd say, in that case, just shut down, enough flotation remain to sort of stay above water...
(Fill the compartments with air and you're good to go!)

Flown the Fireboss, have you, wabano?

I might be wrong on the 1002, but I do believe it is an entire new aircraft. it is not a modified 802 fuel hauler.

[W5]

Can anyone think of any heavier single engine propellor airplanes? The only one I can think is the A-1 Skyraider.

The ones that I can think of:

Martin AM-1 Mauler

http://daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/aircraft/mauler.htm

Grumman AF-2S Guardian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AF_Guardian

The latter was used as a tanker back in the sixties/ seventies.

Offhand I also can think of the s/e turboprop

Fairey Gannett:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet

There are a few links to other oines there as well. I would have thought that the Breguet Alize also was over that number , but apparently not.

[Willis Nigh]

Here's another:
Republic XF-84H Thunderscreech. The loudest plane ever apparently. Made ground crew vomit from noise and one guy had a seizure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XF-84H_Thunderscreech

[Willis Nigh]

That Fairey Gannett is actually a twin engine with counter rotating props in centerline config.

And this thread is way off topic.

[wabano]

AT 802


I understand the AT-1002 is a beefed up version with the same tank as the 802 fueler.

And needed mods...
(Problems sucking up big rocks in the prop, stability even with auto-pilot,
crosswind landings control, and ice protection, as the fueler is flown
24-7 all year in so-so weather...man, how do you de-ice that
huge wing with all the million thingies(VG) sticking up?)
http://www.agairupdate.com/aau/articles ... y2007.html

[fire flyer]

Wrong. I am not sure how one would conclude that a two tank fuel hauling system has any similarity to a fire fighting gate type delivery tank. The 1002 has the same design and function as previous tanks ranging all the way back to the S2, S2R, AT301 etc. There are a few types of gates for various purposes including Air Tractors, Translands, and Conair own new design. The tank on the 1002 does hang lower than the 802 causing the fairing to be larger. This along with a slighter wider tank gets the extra 200 usg.


FF

[threepoint]

Other mods include beefier airframe tubing, along with slightly larger wing and fuselage dimensions over the 802. Engine is the -67F. There is an upgross to 20000 lbs. MTOW. So more retardant plus more room for fuel. The bomber guys will like that.

Except the customers may grow tired of seeing a less-expensive 802 with the same engine fly laps around the new 1002, effectively delivering more product per unit of time in many common mission scenarios. Until they add some power (ie: a new engine) to compensate for the extra 4000 lbs, give me the -67F version of the 802 please.

[Oldfartus]

Except the customers may grow tired of seeing a less-expensive 802 with the same engine fly laps around the new 1002, effectively delivering more product per unit of time in many common mission scenarios. Until they add some power (ie: a new engine) to compensate for the extra 4000 lbs, give me the -67F version of the 802 please.

The 1002 is only 200us gallons more than the 802 that being around 1800lb more not including extra aircraft fuel, how do you get 4000lbs more threepoint?

The 802 with extra pannier is for carrying fuel which has a SG less than water, so weight wise it's only the same as 800 gallons water. The 1002 is certified for 1000 gallons of water plus aircraft fuel. The 802F has an option of a PT6 -67AG of 1350HP, I thought the higher powered option of PT6-67F of 1600HP was only an option for the Fireboss.

Done much time in the 802 or Fireboss threepoint?

There's not much information floating around on the 1002, you would think there would be more photo's and talk around on the W's. Although I hear Old Leylands got the next 2 years production sold already so it doesn't need much promotion.

[fire flyer]

AT-1002 will have a 21,000 pound t/o weight making it 5000 pounds heavier than the AT-802. And yes it will be(at this point)powered by the -67F, same as on the enhanced 802 making the power to weight ratio about the same as the -67AG 802. Add to that the extra airframe of the 1002 being presented to the wind and it is a fair guess, at this stage, it will have degraded performance over the smaller models.

FF

[threepoint]

The 1002 is only 200us gallons more than the 802 that being around 1800lb more not including extra aircraft fuel, how do you get 4000lbs more threepoint?

Done much time in the 802 or Fireboss threepoint?

I was referring to the MGW of the 1002 at 20,000 lbs over the 16,000 of the current 802. I've heard the 1002 will be certified for 21K (before it was actually assembled) and subsequently at 20K; so fireflyer if you know for sure, I'll defer to your knowledge.
Now, Oldfartus, as for your 2nd query, shouldn't you know better than to ask personal questions? Like pretty much everybody else on this forum, I'm just some 15-yr old weenie online in Mom's basement.

[Oldfartus]

No offense meant, I thought you might have been able to pass on some actual differences between the fireboss and the 802.

[threepoint]

No offense meant, I thought you might have been able to pass on some actual differences between the fireboss and the 802.

None taken. Most differences are at this stage theoretical, but reading the performance specs of the 1002, it appears that one may receive better bang for the buck using a newer-model, faster 802.

[Indanao]

Just wonder if anyone can tell me the kind of experience they want to Fly these types?

I have taildragger and ag time from way back. Turbine Helicopter time, also way back.

[all_ramped_up]

Just wonder if anyone can tell me the kind of experience they want to Fly these types?

I have taildragger and ag time from way back. Turbine Helicopter time, also way back.

I actually asked one of the 802 guys from Conair this summer... from what i remember they needed a minimum of 250h of tail dragger time. can't remember the TT requirements though.